THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD M.A.C.M.A No.2882 of 2005 and Cross objections in M.A.C.M.A.No.2882 of 2005 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice P.Durga Prasad) The M.A.C.M.A.No.2882 of 2005 is filed at the instance of the Insurance Company directed against the award passed in M.V.O.P.No.1676 of 2003 dated 06.06.2005 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - cum –District Judge, Nizamabad. The claimants have filed cross objections for enhancement of the compensation. The claimants, who are the wife and children of the deceased A.Nageshwar Rao, filed the petition claiming compensation of Rs.30,00,000/- for the death of the deceased in a motor vehicle accident. According to the petitioners, 01.10.2003 the deceased was going on his TVS bearing No.AP 25H 4909 from Jankampet towards Nizamabad side and when he reached near Hanuman temple, Nehru nagar, a lorry bearing No.RJ 09G 2517 driven by its driver came in opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the TVS of the deceased, due to which he fell down and sustained multiple injuries. While undergoing treatment at Government Head Quarters Hospital, Nizamabad, he succumbed to injuries on the same day at 04.15 P.M. According to the petitioners, the deceased working as telephone mechanic in telecom department and drawing a salary of Rs.12,000/- and earning Rs.10,000/- by cultivation. As such they are entitled for compensation of Rs.30,00,000/-. The 1st respondent, owner of the lorry remained exparte. The 2nd respondent has filed counter denying the averments made in the petition and put the petitioners to strict proof with regard to age, occupation and income of the deceased and also denied the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the lorry. On the above pleadings, the Tribunal has framed the following issues: (1) Whether the accident has taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle bearing No.RJ 09G 2517 by its driver? (2) Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation and if so, to what just amount and against whom? (3) To what relief? P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined on behalf of the petitioners and Exs.A.1 to A.6 were marked. No oral evidence was adduced on behalf of the insurance company, but Ex.B.1 copy of policy was marked. Taking into consideration of the said oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has held issue No.1 in favour of the petitioners holding that the accident was occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry bearing No.RJ 09G 2517 and with regard to issue Nos.2 and 3, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.11,42,500/- with interest at 9% P.A. Aggrieved by the said award and decree, the Insurance Company has filed the appeal questioning the quantum of compensation as highly excessive. The claimants have filed cross objections claiming enhancement of compensation. The Tribunal has taken into consideration of the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.8,511/- and after deducting 1/3rd towards his personal expenses and by applying multiplier 15, arrived the total compensation at Rs.11,25,000/- towards loss of dependency of the petitioners. The Tribunal also awarded Rs.15,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.2,500/- towards funeral expenses. Thus, the Tribunal has awarded total sum of Rs.11,42,500/-. The claimants have pleaded that the deceased is a Government employee and there would be revision of pay scales for every 5 years, as such his monthly income has to be taken as double the monthly salary as on the date of his death for assessing the loss of dependency of the petitioners. Since the deceased having a stable employment in Central Government as per the decision rendered in “Smt. Sarla Verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and another (2009 AIR SCW 4992)” he can be awarded 30% of his earnings towards future prospects. As the deceased was earning Rs.8,511/- per month as per Ex.A.5 last pay certificate, by adding 30% to the monthly salary of the deceased, it comes to Rs.11,064/-. Out of which 1/3rd has to be deducted towards his personal expenses. Thus after deducting the same, the loss of dependency of the petitioners comes to Rs.11064-Rs.3,688 = Rs.7,376/- P.M. Since the deceased aged 43 years, as per the Smt.Sarla Verma’s case (referred supra), the appropriate multiplier applicable to the age of 43 years is ‘14’. Thus, the total loss of dependency of the petitioners comes to Rs.7,376 X 12 X 14 = Rs.12,39,168/-. The Tribunal only awarded Rs.15,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.2,500/- towards funeral expenses. As per Smt.Sarla Verma’s case (referred supra) the petitioners are entitled for Rs.5,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.10,000/- for the 1st petitioner towards loss of consortium. In all, the petitioners are entitled for Rs.12,59,168/-. Thus, the contention of the appellant – insurance company that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is highly excessive cannot be accepted, on the other hand, the claimants are entitled for enhancement of the compensation as observed above. The appellant’s counsel has further pleaded that the interest payable is only at 6%, whereas the Tribunal awarded interest at 9% on the compensation amount. In view of the Smt. Sarla Verma’s case (referred supra) the petitioners are only entitled for interest at 6% P.A. on the compensation amount. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A.No.2882 of 2005 is partly allowed only to the extent of reducing the interest from 9% to 6% P.A. on the compensation payable to the petitioners. The cross-objections filed by the claimants are partly allowed and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.12,59,168/- from Rs.11,42,500/- with interest at 6% P.A. on from the date of filing of the petition till the date of realization. _______________________ JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA. _____________________________ JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD Dated:06-09-2011 Ksp