IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD M.A.C.M.A. No.2020 of 2006 Between: Parnandi Shakuntala and others .. Appellants AND Md. Mahamood Khan and another .. Respondents JUDGMENT: The appeal is directed against the award in O.P. No.146 of 2000 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- District Judge, Karimnagar, dated 20-05-2003. Parnandi Krishna Murthy was going on his scooter on 26-11-1999 at about 8.30 A.M. and near Bommakal by-pass road, lorry No.MH 15G 7686 was driven rashly and negligently in high speed by the owner-cum-driver resulting in dashing of the lorry against the scooter. Krishna Murthy died on the spot and crime No.168 of 1999 was registered by Karimnagar Rural police against the owner-cum-driver. He was prosecuted before the criminal Court and Krishna Murthy at the age of 49 years was earning Rs.8,012/- per month as a teacher in upper primary school, Polampalli. The wife, two daughters, son and mother of Krishna Murthy claimed a compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- from the owner- cum-driver and the insurer of the lorry. The insurer alone contested the claim before the Tribunal putting the claimants to strict proof and claiming the compensation claimed to be excessive. The Tribunal after framing issues on the manner of the accident and the entitlement of the claimants to compensation, conducted the enquiry, during which, it examined P.Ws.1 to 3 and marked Exs.A.1 to A.7 and B.1. The Tribunal rendered its award firstly accepting the evidence of P.W.2, the eye witness, corroborated by Ex.A.1 first information report to place the blame for the accident on the 1st respondent to the claim, which responsibility was also confirmed in Ex.A.2 charge-sheet by the independent statutory investigating agency. The Tribunal, in assessing the compensation, took the age of the deceased as 49 years with reference to Ex.A.3 post- mortem report and Ex.A.7 service register. The salary of the deceased was certified by the employer in Ex.A.6 as Rs.8,012/- and the basic pay was mentioned in Ex.A.7 as Rs.6,750/-. The Tribunal took into consideration a sum of Rs.8,000/- per month as the loss of income, deducted one-third of the same towards the personal expenses of the deceased and applying the multiplier 8, arrived at the loss of dependency at Rs.5,12,000/-. It also awarded Rs.15,000/- each towards loss of consortium and loss of estate and on the total compensation of Rs.5,40,000/-, interest was directed to be paid at 9 per cent per annum. The claimants were aggrieved by the said award and contended herein that interest ought to have been granted at 12 per cent per annum, the multiplier adopted should have been 11 and loss of consortium should have been compensated with Rs.25,000/-. Loss of love and affection for others also should have been compensated by granting a total compensation claimed at Rs.8,00,000/-. Sri M. Ram Mohan Reddy, learned counsel for the claimants and Sri Srinivas Rao Vutla, learned standing counsel for the 2nd respondent are heard, while the 1st respondent remained unrepresented before this Court also. The findings of the Tribunal about the responsibility of the owner-cum-driver of the lorry for the accident and the liability of the insurer to indemnify the said owner-cum-driver of the liability to justly and adequately compensate the dependents of the deceased, are not in dispute. The employment of the deceased as Government teacher at the age of 49 years, earning Rs.8,012/- per month was also not in dispute and the assessment of the loss of dependency on such factors is not in tune with the decision in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation[1]. As the dependents of the deceased were five in number, the deduction towards personal expenses could have been only at one-fourth of the income and therefore, the loss of dependency should have been calculated at Rs.6,000/- per month or Rs.72,000/- per year. The appropriate multiplier for a person of the age of 49 years is 13 as per Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation (1 supra) and if so, the compensation payable towards loss of dependency would have been Rs.9,36,000/-. That apart, the claimants should have been entitled to Rs.5,000/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses and Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium, making a total compensation of Rs.9,56,000/-. However, the claimants in their claim and in this appeal have confined their request for grant of compensation to Rs.8,00,000/- and the compensation to be awarded can, therefore, be confined to that sum. In so far as the interest payable under Section 171 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is concerned, though the Tribunal awarded interest at 9 per cent per annum, it has to be remembered that the insurer also is a custodian of public funds and has to pay such interest from the date of the petition in 2000 up to the date of payment or deposit for more than 11 years and therefore, it will be in the interests of justice to confine the interest to 6 per cent per annum as done by the Apex court in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation (1 supra). Therefore, the award, dated 20-05-2003 in O.P. No.146 of 2000 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- District Judge, Karimnagar is modified by awarding a total compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- (Rupees eight lakhs only) with interest thereon at 6 per cent per annum from the date of the petition till the date of realization and costs. The apportionment of the compensation shall be in the same proportion in which the compensation originally awarded was directed to be apportioned and no directions need be given at this distance of time regarding disbursement of the compensation. The civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed accordingly without costs. _____________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date: 23-09-2011 Svv [1] 2009 ACJ 1298