HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED M.A.C.M.A. NO. 844 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: This Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, is directed against the Judgment and Decree dated 16.6.2003 passed by the IV Additional Chief Judge cum Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short ‘the Tribunal’) in OP No. 2575 of 2001 filed by the claimant claiming compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- for the death of one Kotaiah @ Narsimha in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 24.11.2001 when the deceased and some others were travelling in an auto bearing No. AP 11 V 7345 at about 5.00AM near crusher Machine, Agapally Village Manchala Mandal, R. R. District, a lorry bearing No. AP 12 U 2366 came in opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and gave dash to the auto and due to which, the deceased Kotaiah @ Narsimha sustained fracture injuries and succumbed to injuries after four days in the hospital. First respondent-owner of the lorry bearing No. AP 12 U 2366 remained ex parte and the second respondent insurer, United India Insurance Company Limited filed its counter denying the averments made in the petition. 2. The Tribunal held that the accident was occurred only due to rash and negligent driving of the lorry bearing No. AP 12 U 2366 by its driver and fixed the liability on both the respondents. As far as the quantum of compensation is concerned, taking into consideration the evidence of PW 1, wife of the deceased, the Tribunal awarded Rs. 2,05,800/- to the claimants with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment. Aggrieved by the same, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the claimants. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the claimants submits that the Tribunal failed to consider the income of the deceased as claimed by the claimants and it erred in taking the meager income on surmises and conjectures. He also submits that the Tribunal had wrongly granted less compensation towards consortium, loss of estate, and transportation. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for respondents submits that the order of the Tribunal is quite reasonable and there is no need to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal, but as far as the rate of interest is concerned, the rate of interest granted by the Tribunal may be reduced. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for both sides and also perused the entire material made available on record. 6. It is evident from the record that the accident was occurred on 24.11.2001 when the deceased and some others were travelling in an auto bearing No. AP 11 V 7345 at about 5.00AM near crusher Machine, Agapally Village Manchala Mandal, R. R. District, a lorry bearing No. AP 12 U 2366 came in opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and gave dash to the auto and due to which, the deceased Kotaiah sustained fracture injuries and succumbed to injuries after four days in the hospital. PW-1 deposed that her deceased husband was a labourer and was getting Rs. 4,000/- per month. As there was no evidence with regard to income of the deceased, the Tribunal taken the income of the deceased at Rs. 40/- per day. Therefore, ends of justice would be met if Rs. 2,000/- per month is taken as the income of the deceased and per annum it comes to Rs. 24,000/-. Out of that if 1/3rd of the amount deducted towards personal and living expenses, the amount comes to Rs. 16,000/- ( 24,000 x 1/3 = 8,000 - 24,000/- =16,000/-). As the age of the deceased is 27 years the relevant and appropriate multiplier is 17 as per the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in SARALA VERMA VS. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION[1] and if applied the correct multiplier, the amount comes to Rs. 2,72,000/- (16,000x17=2,72,000). An amount of Rs. 10,000/- is granted towards loss of estate and Rs. 10,000/- is granted towards loss of consortium. Thus the total amount of compensation granted comes to Rs. 2,92,000/- ( 2,72,000 + 10,000 + 10,000 = 2,92,000 ). 7. Accordingly, this appeal filed by the claimants is allowed in part enhancing the compensation granted by the Tribunal from Rs. 2,05,800/- to Rs. 2,92,000/-. As far as the interest is concerned, the rate of interest granted by the Tribunal is reduced from 9% per annum to 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J Date: 10.03.2011 KA [1] 2009 (6) scale 129