THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI C.M.A. No.680 of 2003 Date : 29-07-2010 Between : Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, rep. by its Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad and another .. Appellants And Chowda Narayana @ Souda Narayana and another .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI C.M.A. No.680 of 2003 JUDGMENT: This is an appeal filed by the APSRTC challenging the award in O.P.No.918 of 2000, dated 29-07-2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (District Judge) Nizamabad, whereunder the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.3,77,500/- in favour of the respondents herein (claimants). The claimants filed the O.P. and sought for compensation of a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- on account of the death of their son Chowda Laxminarayana @ Souda Laxminarayana. On 18-09-1999 the said deceased was proceeding on a bicycle from Bhiknoor to Rameshwarpalli Village. The bus bearing registration No. 10 Z 5139 belonging to the appellants herein, driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver, dashed against the deceased causing his death on the spot. The deceased was aged 19 years. He was milk vendor, besides doing agricultural work and earning Rs.6,000/- per month. The appellant contested the claim and denied rash and negligence and also the quantum of compensation as excessive. The claimant No.1, the father of the deceased, examined himself as P.W.1 and examined one, T.Raja Reddy as P.W.2. Ex.A1 (C.C. of F.I.R. in Cr.No.98/99 of P.S., Bhiknoor), Ex.A2 (C.C. of charge-sheet), Ex.A3 (C.C. of Inquest Panchanama), Ex.A4 (C.C. of P.M.E. Report), Ex.A5 (C.C. of M.V.I. Report) were marked on behalf of the claimants. The appellants examined its driver as R.W.1 but did not mark any document. Based on the evidence, the Tribunal recorded a finding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the vehicle by the driver of the appellants’ vehicle. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed. Heard both the learned counsel. In this appeal the appellants dispute only the quantum of compensation. It is the case of the claimants that the deceased was earning Rs.6,000/- per month from agricultural work assisting his father and also as milk vendor. Except the evidence of P.W.2, no other evidence was placed to support the said claim. The Tribunal, therefore, rightly assessed the monthly income at Rs.3,000/-. Based on the same, the contribution was computed at Rs.24,000/- per annum after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased. The learned counsel for the appellants would contend that as there are only two claimants, who are the parents, applying the judgment of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma Vs. DTC [1], 50% is liable to be deducted instead of 1/3rd as applied by the Tribunal. Therefore, the computable income is Rs.18,000/- (Rs.1,500 x 12) per annum. The Tribunal applied ‘15’ multiplier rightly and in such an event the amount would be Rs.2,70,000/- (Rs.18,000 x 15). In addition to the same, the claimants are also entitled for Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate, which the Tribunal has already granted and Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses as against Rs.2,500/- granted by the Tribunal. In all, the claimants are entitled for Rs.2,90,000/- as against the Rs.3,77,500/- awarded by the Tribunal. Therefore, the excess amount of Rs.87,500/- (Rs.3,77,500/- – Rs.2,90,000/-) is liable to be reduced. The Award in O.P. No.918 of 2000 is modified accordingly. The appeal is allowed in part as indicated above. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 29th July, 2010. skmr [1] (2009) 6 SCC 121