THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY M.A.C.M.A.No.3746 of 2008 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the order, dated 20.02.2007, in M.V.O.P.No.895 of 2004 on the file of the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- I Additional District Judge, Kurnool, wherein the said claim application filed by the appellant herein under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ( for brevity, ‘the Act’), for compensation, was allowed awarding a sum of Rs.58,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of the petition. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 3. Claimant, who is the mother of the deceased-minor girl, filed the claim application seeking compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for the death of her daughter, who died in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 09.03.2004. According to the claimant, on that day herself, her husband, the deceased and two other daughters were returning home from Yellamma temple on a motor cycle and a lorry bearing No.AP-21-VTR-7000 coming from Kurnool side in a rash and negligent manner dashed the motor cycle as a result of which the husband of the claimant died on the spot and her minor daughter, who sustained grievous injuries, died while undergoing treatment in the hospital. 4. According to the claimant, the deceased was aged 7 years and was studying in a school. 1st respondent remained ex parte. 2nd respondent filed counter opposing the claim and denying their liability to pay the compensation. 5. During enquiry, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A1 to A4 were marked on behalf of the claimants. No oral evidence was adduced but Ex.B1-copy of the policy was marked on behalf of the respondents. 6. On a consideration of the evidence available on record, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry by its driver. The said finding is not challenged as no appeal is filed by the insurer. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.7000/- towards incidental expenses; Rs.1000/- towards funeral expenses and compensation of Rs.50,000/-, presumably for loss of love and affection, making up a total sum of Rs.58,000/- with interest @ 7.5% p.a. Not satisfied with the same, claimant preferred the present appeal seeking enhancement. The main contention of the learned counsel for the appellant-claimant is that the Tribunal has ignored the aspect of loss of earning capacity of the child. It is to be noted that the deceased was a young girl aged 7 years and was stated to be studying in a school. She has not reached the age where she would be acquiring capacity to earn. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant relied upon a decision reported in NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. PITTALA RAMULU AND OTHERS[1], wherein this Court confirmed the award granting Rs.1,54,500/- by taking notional income at Rs.15,000/- and applying the multiplier of ‘15’ in case of a child aged one year. He also relied upon a decision of a Division Bench of the High Court of Madras in UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANAY LIMITED v. NEDUNCHELLAN[2], wherein also the Court confirmed the award granting compensation of Rs.1,79,500/- in case of death of a child aged 5 years. 8. In the above said decision, reference was made to MANJU DEVI v. MUSAFIR PASWAN[3], wherein the apex Court in the case of death of a boy aged 13 years held that though the boy was a non earning person the income of Rs.15,000/- should be taken on notional basis and applying the multiplier ‘15’, awarded a sum of Rs.2,25,000/-. 9. In the above decision reference was also made to a decision reported in LATA WADHWA v. STATE OF BIHAR[4], wherein the apex Court held that in the case of death of the child the parents would be entitled for a total amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. 10. The II schedule of the Act states that in case of a non earning member the notional income has to be taken as Rs.15,000/- per annum and 1/3rd thereof be deducted towards personal expenses and the multiplier to be adopted is ‘15’’. 11. Though the deceased was aged only 7 years and was still school going and has not attained the capacity of earning as on the date of the accident, still the possibility of the child becoming capable of earning something and contributing the same to the family but for the accident cannot be ruled out. Thus taking the II Schedule of the Act as a guide the loss of earning capacity has to be estimated by taking the notional income of Rs.15,000/- per annum and after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses the contribution to the family would come to Rs.10,000/. 12. In National Insurance Company Limited’s case (1st cited supra), it was observed as follows: “It may be true that a child of one year age cannot be expected to earn any income and it would be difficult to imagine as to what he would have been, in case he did not meet with the fatal accident. Such questions are in realm of speculation. But, it must be recognized that in the matter of awarding compensation, the issue cannot be approached in strict terms of commerce or calculations. Several contingencies have to be taken into account and, ultimately, a decent balance needs to be maintained, between the conflicting factors”. 13. In the present case, the child is aged 7 years and having regard to the fact that the claimants hail from a rural family and belong to working class community the prospect of the child acquiring earning capacity and making contribution to the family within a couple of years had she not met with the unfortunate accident cannot be lost sight of. If the notional income of the deceased is taken at Rs.15,000/- per annum as per the II Schedule of the Act, which may be taken as a guide and her contribution to the family at Rs.10,000/- per annum and applying the multiplier ‘15’ the amount awardable towards loss of earning capacity would come to Rs.1,50,000/- but in fact the appellant has claimed only Rs.1,00,000/-. It cannot therefore be said that the amount claimed by the appellant, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, is either unreasonable or excessive. Appellant-claimant is therefore held entitled for the said amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for the death of her deceased minor daughter with interest @ 7.5% p.a. on the original amount awarded by the Tribunal from the date of the petition and 6% on the enhanced amount from the date of the appeal. The impugned award is modified accordingly. 14. In the result, appeal is allowed to the extent stated above. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 28th October, 2011 Tsy [1] 2007 ACJ 1003 [2] 2006-ANDHWR-2-171 [3] 2005 ACJ 99 (SC) [4] 2001 ACJ 1735 (SC)