HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.2225 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: The appeal is filed by the appellants/petitioners against the order in O.P.No.447 of 2004 (Old O.P.No.1465 of 2001) on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Judge, Nalgonda at Suryapet, questioning the quantum of compensation. 2. According to the case of the petitioners, on 19.08.2001 when the deceased Venkata Ramana was standing in front of his house, the lorry bearing No.AP 22 T 5599 came in a rash and negligent manner driven by its driver and dashed against the deceased, as a result of which, he fell down on the ground and the lorry ran over from the head of the deceased and died on the spot. The deceased was said to be earning Rs.10,000/- per month from his agriculture and brick industry. The 1st petitioner is wife, petitioners Nos.2 to 4 are the children, and the 5th petitioner is mother of the deceased and they are the dependants on the deceased. The 1st respondent, who is owner of the vehicle, remained ex parte and the 2nd respondent, who is Insurance Company, filed a counter, denying the averments in the petition, and putting the petitioners to strict proof of rashness and negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle and cause of death of the deceased. After considering the evidence on record, the learned Tribunal found that the incident was due to the fault of the driver of the lorry as alleged and taking into consideration the income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- and applying the multiplier of ‘17’ granted a compensation of Rs.4,03,500/-. 3. The learned counsel for the appellants contends that the deceased owned about Acs.12.00 Gts., of land and he was getting good income and apart from it, he was having brick business. To prove the income or the business, no evidence is adduced though documents were filed with regard to owning of the property. Therefore, the income determined by the lower Tribunal cannot be said to be on a lower side. But, however, taking into consideration the fact that the deceased was holding Acs.12.00 Gts., of land, which is not seriously disputed, the income of the deceased is fixed at Rs.4,000/- and since the 5th petitioner is mother and all other petitioners are grown up, 1/3rd is deducted towards personal expenditure, and fixed annual income of the deceased at Rs.32,004/-. Taking into consideration the age of the deceased and after applying the multiplier ‘16’, the total dependency comes to Rs.5,12,064/-. The petitioners are entitled to non-pecuniary damages of Rs.10,000/- and as the 1st petitioner lost her husband, she is entitled for a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium. The total compensation to which the petitioners are entitled to is Rs.5,32,064/-. The interest shall be at 7.5% per annum on the total compensation. The apportionment shall be as decided by the lower Tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________________ JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO Date:22.09.2011 INL