THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 243 of 2008 DATE: 23-03-2011 Between: The Managing Director, APSRTC, Musheerabad, Hyderabad .. Appellant And Battula Satyanarayana and 4 others .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 243 of 2008 JUDGMENT: Being aggrieved against the order and decree dated 15.04.2005 passed in M.V.O.P.No.148 of 2000 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, Machilipatnam, the present Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed. The appellant herein is the 2nd respondent in the Tribunal below. It is the contention of Sri K.Satyanarayana Murthy, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation that the lower Court without deducting 50% of the income from the earnings of the deceased, but deducted only one- third, which is erroneous as the deceased being unmarried. Now the point for consideration is whether the order and decree of the lower Court is sustainable? As seen from the impugned order, it was held that the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle and, therefore, the respondents 1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation to the petitioners. As seen from the impugned order, in the Court below two witnesses were examined as P.Ws.1 and 2 and marked Exs.A-1 and A-2. P.W.1 is the father of the deceased. According to him, the deceased was earning Rs.5,000/- per month as driver but did not file any proof in support of his contention. The Court below estimated the income of the deceased at Rs.1,500/- per month, in my view, the same is just and reasonable. The Tribunal below deducted one-third towards the personal expenses but while applying the decision reported in the case of SARLA VERMA (SMT) AND OTHERS vs. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER[1], 50% is to be deducted towards personal expenses. Thus, the total contribution to the family of the deceased would be Rs.750/- per month and the annual contribution would be Rs.9,000/- per annum. The deceased being the unmarried person, the lower Court considering the age of the father of the deceased as 47 years, applied multiplier ‘13’. As seen from the description of the parties in the M.V.O.P., the age of the father is noted as 42 years. The M.V.O.P. was filed in the year 2000 and the orders were pronounced in April, 2005. The lower Court on the reasoning fixed the age of the father of the deceased as 47 years and accordingly applied multiplier ‘13’. Thus, the compensation works out to Rs.9,000/- X 13 = Rs.1,17,000/- (Rupees one lakh seventeen thousand only). The lower Court granted an amount of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of expectancy of life and estate. Accordingly, the said amount is granted. Thus, the total compensation works out to Rs.1,32,000/- (Rupees one lakh thirty two thousand only). With the above modification, the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed. No order as to costs. _______________ K.S.APPA RAO, J 23-03-2011 MR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 243 of 2008 DATE: 23-03-2011 MR [1] (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121