1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR FIRST APPEAL NO.734 OF 2009. M/s National Insurance Co.Ltd. ..vs..Smt.Nirmala Wd/o Ramdas Chafle and ors. =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- C ORAM : C.L.PANGARKAR, J. DATED : 12th October, 2009. 1. Heard Smt.S.P.Deshpande, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.M.B.Naidu, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This appeal has been preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The deceased was traveling in an Auto Rickshaw. The said auto rickshaw met with an accident. The deceased suffered injuries and died. It is alleged that the deceased was an agriculturist and 50 years old at the time of his death. A compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- was claimed. 2 3. The said application was opposed by the Insurance Company i.e. the present appellant. The appellant denied that the deceased was travelling in auto rickshaw. It was contended that the children of the deceased are now working and there is no loss of income at all. The learned judge of the Tribunal found that the income of the deceased was Rs.3000/- per month. He was 50 years old. He deducted more than one-third of the amount and took the monthly loss at Rs.1600/-. He has applied multiplier of 10. He also awarded Rs.10,000/- for loss of love and affection and Rs.3000/- for funeral expenses etc. He awarded a sum of Rs.2,30,000/-. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant urges before me that the amount awarded by the court is too excessive. She submits that there was no proof of age of the deceased and also there was no proof of the income of the deceased. She submits that the income should have been taken at Rs.15000/- per year only. As far as age is concerned, the application goes to show that the age of the wife of the deceased is 40 years and his son is 21 years of age. Considering this aspect, there is no difficulty in holding that age of the deceased was 50 years. The learned judge of the Tribunal has rightly held the age 3 to be 50. As far as the income of the deceased is concerned, she submits that there was no documentary evidence with regard to income. The deceased was an agriculturist. It is, therefore, difficult to show that he has had an income of Rs. 3000/- per month. However, it appears that the claimants had examined one of the claimants as a witness in the matter and he has stated that the deceased was earning Rs.3000/- per month. In any case, the Supreme Court in the recent decision reported in (2009)6 SCC 121 (Sarla Verma (Smt.) and ors. ..vs.. Delhi Transport Corporation and anr.) has held that the income of the person in respect of whom the eidence is not available should be taken as Rs.3000/- per month. In view of this, the learned judge of the trial court did not err in holding the income of the deceased to be Rs.3000/- per month. He has deducted more than one-third of the amount and has determined the loss of dependency at Rs.1600/- per month and has applied multiplier of 10. The deceased left behind him four marriageable daughters and a son. The dependency is also very large. Considering this aspect, multiplier of 10 is not excessive. In view of this, there is no substance in the appeal. It is dismissed. JUDGE. Chute 4