THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED M.A.C.M.A. No.1045 of 2005 ORDER: This appeal by the insurance company is directed against the judgment dated 05.01.2005 passed by the learned V Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court-cum-Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kurnool in M.V.O.P.No.436 of 2003, whereby the claim petition of the first respondent herein was allowed awarding compensation of Rs.1,28,500/-. Brief facts of the case are that on 17.05.2003, when the first respondent was going to his fields on his bullock cart at about 6.00 a.m. to plough his lands, on the way, lorry bearing No.KA 03 8748 being driven by the driver with high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, without blowing horn, dashed against the bullock cart from behind, which resulted injuries to the first respondent and damage to his bullock cart. Immediately, the first respondent was shifted to Government General Hospital, Gooty and from there to Government General Hospital, Kurnool. He was hospitalized for several days and incurred huge expenditure. Therefore, the first respondent filed the claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- for the injuries received by him. To prove his claim, the claimant examined himself as P.W.1 and marked Exs.A-1 to A-9 i.e., F.I.R., wound certificate, charge sheet, medical bills, disability certificate etc.,. The insurance company examined no witness, however, marked Ex.B-1 policy copy. The Tribunal, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence on record, observed that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the lorry, due to which the first respondent received injuries, hospitalized, incurred huge expenditure and suffered 25% disability. Accordingly, the Tribunal awarded Rs.10,000/- towards permanent disability, Rs.43,500/- towards injuries and fracture, Rs.50,000/- towards loss of earning capacity, Rs.10,000/- towards medicine, transport and attendant charges, Rs.5,000/- towards extra nourishment and Rs.10,000/- towards pain and suffering, in all it awarded Rs.1,28,500/- with proportionate costs and interest at 9% per annum from the date of the claim petition till realization. The learned counsel for the first respondent/claimant submitted that the claimant being an agriculturist was earning income of Rs.5,000/- per month therefrom; that since the claimant was aged 35 years at the time of accident, multiplier ‘16’ is appropriate as per Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation[1] and accordingly, compensation may be awarded. I find force in the submission of the learned counsel. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, especially since the first respondent/claimant being an agriculturist was earning sufficient income and he suffered 25% disability, I am of the view that taking his income at Rs.3,000/- per month would be appropriate. Accordingly, his annual income comes to 36,000/-. Since this is a case of injury, 25% of the annual income is taken for the purpose of calculating the compensation, which comes to Rs.9,000/-. As regards the age of the first respondent, his age was 36 years at the time of accident and therefore, appropriate multiplier is ‘15’ as per Sarla Verma’s case. Accordingly, the compensation is arrived at Rs.1,35,000/- (9,000 X 15). Accordingly, the M.A.C.M.A. is dismissed. However, the compensation is enhanced from Rs.1,28,500/- to Rs.1,35,000/-, which shall carry interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition till realization. No costs. _______________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J 29th July, 2010 GHN [1] (2009) 6 SCC 121 = 2009(3) Supreme Today 487