THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.M.A.No.236 of 2001 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed by the APSRTC against the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional District Judge, Warangal, in M.V.O.P.No.90 of 1999, dated 28-09-2000, wherein and whereby, as against the claim of Rs.4,00,000/-, the Tribunal had awarded compensation of Rs.2,52,000/- to the claimants. Heard both sides. The nature of accident, which occurred on 13-10-1998 resulting in the death of the son of claimants 1 and 2 and the brother of claimant No.3 is not in dispute. The finding on issue No.1 reached by the Tribunal below that there was rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by the driver of the bus is not disputed in this appeal. The learned counsel for the appellant has, however, raised a contention regarding the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal below. He submits that there is no evidence of the actual income of the deceased as such, the same is estimated by the Tribunal at Rs.2,100/- per month and 1/3rd there from is deducted towards his personal expenses and keeping in view the fact that the deceased was a bachelor, the youngest of the age of the parents i.e., mother’s age at 42 is taken into consideration and a multiplier of 15 was applied. The Tribunal, therefore, came to a conclusion that a compensation of Rs.2,52,000/- is payable. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court in SARLA VERMA Vs. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER[1] placing reliance upon paragraphs 15 and 21 thereof contends that even assuming that the earning of the deceased was at Rs.2,100/- per month, since he was a bachelor, 50% of the amount was required to be deducted as personal expenses. Similarly, the learned counsel also states that the multiplier relevant to the age of the youngest of the parents would be 14 and not 15 as per the above decision. Learned counsel for the respondents contends that the award need not be interfered with in view of the fact that a reasonable compensation was awarded and particularly the claim made by the claimants being Rs.4,00,000/-, only part of the amount was decreed and there is no appeal by the claimants. Irrespective of the beneficial nature of the claim under the Motor Vehicles Act where compensation is liable to be granted for negligent actions of use of motor vehicle, the standardization of the method of determining the compensation, which is now almost settled by the decision of the Supreme Court, referred to above, has to be followed. In paragraph 15 of the aforesaid judgment, the Supreme Court had categorically laid down that the deduction towards personal expenses may vary according to the number of dependants, but in case of bachelor normally the deduction should be 50%. Therefore, applying the said criteria against Rs.2,100/- assessed by the Tribunal, after deducting 50% thereon, the loss of dependency for one month would work out to Rs.1050/-. Thereby, the annually it would be at Rs.12,600/-. After applying the multiplier ‘14’, the compensation would work out to Rs.1,76,400/-. The compensation of Rs.2,52,000/- awarded by the Tribunal shall, therefore, stand reduced to Rs.1,76,400/-. However, the Tribunal has not awarded the conventional amount towards the loss of estate. As beneficial legislation is to be applied even in the absence of appeal, the claimants in addition to the said compensation of Rs.1,76,400/-, they are also entitled for a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate. The amount of compensation would, therefore, work out to Rs.1,91,400/- will also be subject to the proportionate distribution as ordered by the Tribunal below. The appeal is accordingly allowed-in-part. However, there shall be no order as to costs. As per the interim order of this court pending appeal, the appellant has deposited half of the amount, which is said to have been withdrawn by the claimants. Since the appeal is now allowed-in-part, the other half of the compensation amount is now be payable by the appellant with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of claim till realization. ________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Dated: 08-02-2010 Prv [1] 2009 ACJ 1298