THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 1851 of 2011 JUDGMENT: The appeal is filed by the claimants against the award dated 13.12.2004 in O.P.No.225 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle questioning the compensation consequent on the death of the deceased Rama Chandra in a motor accident. The allegations in the petition go to show that on 22.05.2002 when the deceased was going in an auto bearing No.AP-10-T-5752 belonged to the 5th respondent, a lorry bearing No.AP-21-T-5588 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the tractor and thereafter the auto-rickshaw and caused the death of the deceased. The deceased was a weaver, earning Rs.10,000/- per month and the petitioners are the dependants on him and he was aged about 32 years. The insurance company of the auto and also the tractor-trailor and the lorry shifted mutual responsibility on each other and ultimately after enquiry, the lower Tribunal found that the incident was due to the fault of the driver of the lorry and held the 2nd respondent-Oriental Insurance Company liable for payment of compensation of Rs.1,82,352/- as against the claim of the appellants for a sum of Rs.3,50,000/-. The learned counsel for the appellants contends that the lower Tribunal has fixed the income of the deceased at a low amount. According to her, the deceased was earning Rs.10,000/- per month as a weaver. Evidently, there is no evidence on record to show that the deceased was earning by self weaving or by employment. But, however, by the date of accident even in cases of labourers the income is fixed at Rs.1,500/- per month and taking into consideration the technical skill of the deceased the income is fixed at Rs.1,800/- and the contribution to the family is fixed at Rs.1,200/- per month, which comes to Rs.14,400/- per annum. Since the deceased was said to be aged about 32 years, the multiplier ‘16’ is applied by applying the decision in SARLA VERMA (SMT) AND OTHERS vs. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER[1]. The learned counsel for the respondents contends that the age of the deceased was wrongly shown and he was aged above 40 years. Evidently, there is no material to come to a different conclusion about the age assessed by the lower Tribunal. Therefore, taking into consideration the above fact, the loss of dependency comes to Rs.2,30,400/- (Rs.14,400/- X 16). The lower Tribunal has also granted a compensation of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.15,000/- towards non-pecuniary damages. I do not find any justification for grant of funeral expenses as further claimed by the appellant. Therefore, the total compensation for which the petitioners are entitled is Rs.2,60,400/- (Rupees two lakhs sixty thousand and four hundred only). Accordingly, the award of the lower Tribunal is modified and the petitioners are entitled to a compensation of Rs.2,60,400/- (Rupees two lakhs sixty thousand and four hundred only) and the apportionment shall be proportionate to the same as done by the lower Tribunal. The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at 6% per annum. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. No costs. ________________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO, J 30-08-2011 MR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 1851 of 2011 DATE: 30-08-2011 MR [1] (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121