IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THIS THE 5th DAY OF AUGUST, 2010 CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.2506 of 2003 Between United India Insurance Company Ltd., rep. by its Divisional Manager …APPELLANT(S) A N D Devunuri Shantha and others …RESPONDENT(S) THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.2506 of 2003 ORAL JUDGMENT: Heard both sides. 2. Questioning the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District Judge, Adilabad (for brevity “the Tribunal”), in O.P.No.819 of 1998, by order and decree, dated 27.12.2002, for the death of one Devunuri Linga Murthy (hereinafter referred to as ‘the deceased’) in a road accident that occurred on 10.04.1998, the appellant-United India Insurance Company Limited filed the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. 3. Appellant is the insurer, respondent Nos.1 to 4 are the claimants/legal heirs of the deceased and 5th respondent is the owner of the offending vehicle i.e., lorry. 4. The particulars regarding the method and manner in which the accident took place and the rash and negligence etc., are not referred to herein, as they are not in dispute. 5. The Tribunal, after appreciating the entire material, including the evidence, both oral and documentary, available on record, awarded a total sum of Rs.7,90,520/- towards compensation to the claimants for the death of the deceased in the accident. 6. The only point that arises for consideration, in this appeal, is whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is proper and justified? 7. I have carefully gone through the impugned order, along with other material, available on record. This is a case of death of the deceased who was working as a mason in M/s. Singareni Colleries Limited. There is no dispute about the income of the deceased and the same has been substantially established. The accident also has been proved wherein the deceased was held to have died because of the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle i.e., lorry bearing No.AHT-314. The claimants have claimed a sum of Rs.8,15,000/-, towards compensation, under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Tribunal, having elaborately dealt with all the aspects, came to the conclusion that the claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.7,76,520/- towards loss of earnings, Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs.10,000/- towards consortium to the 1st claimant, and Rs.2,000/- towards loss of estate; and awarded a total compensation of Rs.7,90,520/-. 8. While calculating the loss of earnings, the Tribunal applied the multiplier ‘15’ taking into consideration the age of the deceased as 44 years. But, it is to be seen that as per SARLA VERMA vs. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION[1] the multiplier applicable for a person aged between 41 years to 45 years is ‘14’. Even if the multiplier ‘14’ is applied to the case on hand, the difference would be very marginal. Therefore, I do not wish to interfere with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, in the interest of justice. 9. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal at the rate of 9% per annum is on higher side. Therefore, the same is reduced from 9% to 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realisation. In all other aspects and respects, the impugned order and decree shall remain unaltered. 10. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed in part, to the extent indicated above. However, there shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA 05th AUGUST 2010 CVRK [1] AIR 2009 SUPREME COURT 3104