THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI C.M.A No.791 of 1999 Date: 18.12.2009 Between: Smt. J.Nelly Jasmine and others. And P.Pedda Alluri Reddy & United India Insurance Company Ltd., Rep by its Regional Manager, IV Floor, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI C.M.A No.791 of 1999 JUDGMENT: Heard. This appeal is filed by the wife and two children of the deceased-Devadanam (hereinafter called as claimants) for enhancement of compensation. On 3.6.1996, while the deceased Devadanam as a pillion rider was proceeding on a motorcycle, a lorry bearing No.AAZ 1689 coming in the opposite direction, dashed the motorcycle, as a result of which, Devadanam died on the spot. The claimants filed a petition claiming compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- from the respondents. The 1st respondent remained exparte and the 2nd respondent filed a counter opposing the claim. The Claims Tribunal formulated two points for consideration:- “(1) Whether the deceased died in the motor vehicle accident on 3.6.1996 due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle belonging to the 1st respondent or whether there was any contributory negligence on the part of both the vehicles? (2) Whether the claimants were entitled to the compensation, and if so, what amount?” Before the Claims Tribunal, the claimants got themselves examined as P.Ws.1 & 2 and marked ten documents, Exs.A1 to A10. On behalf of the respondents, no witnesses were examined and marked one document Insurance Policy as Ex.B1. The Claims Tribunal, on examining the evidence on record consisting of Ex.A1-certified copy of the FIR, Ex.A2 the certified copy of charge sheet, Ex.A3 the certified copy of the Inquest Report, Ex.A4 the certified copy of the MVI Report, recorded a finding that there was rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry bearing No.AAZ 1689. On point No.2, the Claims Tribunal, based on Ex.A7, which is the Secondary School Certificate of the deceased, recorded a finding that the date of birth of the deceased was 1.6.1948 and his age at the time of accident was about 48 years. The Claims Tribunal also recorded a finding that the deceased was working as a Security Guard in KCP Limited, Macharla and earning Rs.1,752/- per month. As per the service particulars resulted in Exs.A7 & A8, the Tribunal recorded the finding that the annual income of the deceased was Rs.18,000/- and after deducting 1/3rd, an amount of Rs.12,000/- was being contributed to the family. On the basis of the same, the Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.1,44,000/- towards future loss of income. The Claims Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards loss to estate, thus, a total sum of Rs.1,59,000/- was awarded against the respondents jointly and severally. Since in this appeal the claimants have sought for enhancement and there is no appeal by the other side, it is not necessary to go into the question of negligence. The question therefore is what is the adequate compensation? There is no dispute with regard to the age of the deceased and his income, and the Claims Tribunal applied ‘12’ multiplier to award the said amount of compensation. As can be seen from the II schedule, in respect of a person, whose age is between 45 and 50 years, multiplier ‘13’ has to be applied. By application of the said multiplier, the claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.1,56,000/-. Thus the appellants are entitled to the differential amount between Rs.1,56,000/- and 1,44,000/-. Therefore, the appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.12,000/- as enhancement over and above the amount awarded by the Claims Tribunal. Thus the award of the Claims Tribunal is modified by granting Rs.12,000/- over and above the amount awarded at the rate of interest 6% per annum. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed without costs. ______________________ JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Date:18.12.2009 mrb