HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD L.P.A.No. 230 of 2001 Date: 31-01-2011 Between: Chukkabotla Devanna and others ……… Appellants and National Insurance Company Limited, Nizamabad branch, Nizamabad District and others ……….. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD L.P.A.No. 230 of 2001 ORDER: (Per PDP, J) This Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letter Patent arises out of the judgment in A.A.O.No.1709 of 1994 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court on 18-12-2000. The appellants-claimants filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Adilabad, claiming compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- pleading that on 11-11-1993 at about 11-30 AM, while one Chukkabotla Sanjeev (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) was coming from his field after doing work towards his village on National Highway No.7, the lorry bearing No.AP J 4345 came at high speed driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the deceased, as a result of which he fell down and sustained multiple injuries and subsequently, he succumbed to the injuries while undergoing treatment. The appellants-claimants are the father, mother and sister of the deceased. According to them, the deceased was aged about 17 years and he was earning Rs.20,000/- per annum from agriculture, and maintaining the entire family. The insurance company, the owner and the driver of the vehicle have filed counters pleading before the Tribunal that the accident has not occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the lorry and put the claimants to strict proof with regard to the age of the deceased and his earnings. The Tribunal held that the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry and by taking into consideration the avocation of the deceased, fixed his monthly income at Rs.500/- per month and awarded the compensation to his mother and father separately basing on their age, separate to his sister totally Rs.1,27,000/- including Rs.25,000/- towards non- pecuniary damages. Aggrieved by the same, the Insurance Company filed A.A.O.No.1709 of 1994 and the learned single Judge of this Court, by taking into consideration the contribution of the deceased at Rs.250/- and the age of the mother as 38 years and applying the multiplier at 14.5, awarded the compensation of Rs.58,500/- by reducing the non-pecuniary damages to Rs.15,000/-. Aggrieved by the order of the learned single Judge, the claimants preferred the present Appeal. The main contention of the learned counsel for the appellants-claimants is that the Tribunal has taken the contribution of the deceased towards the family as Rs.500/- per month and wrongly divided in two parts each Rs.250/- per month for father and mother separately. When the deceased was contributing Rs.500/- per month as per the finding of the Tribunal, the same was not taken into consideration by the learned single Judge while fixing the compensation. The learned counsel for claimants did not dispute the multiplier applied by the learned single Judge at 14.5, and awarded Rs.15,000/- towards non-pecuniary damages. In the circumstances, by taking into consideration the contribution of the deceased towards the family members at Rs.500/-, the annual loss of dependency comes to Rs.6,000/- (Rs.500 x 12), and by applying multiplier 14.5, the total loss of dependency comes to Rs.87,000/- (Rs.6,000/- x 14.5). The non-pecuniary damages of Rs.15,000/- awarded by the learned single Judge stands confirmed. Thus the total compensation payable to the appellants-claimants is Rs.1,02,000/- (Rs.87,000/- + Rs.15,000/-) Accordingly, the Appeal is allowed enhancing the compensation to Rs.1,02,000/- from Rs.58,500/- with interest of 6% per annum on the enhanced amount. No order as to costs. _________________ B. PRAKASH RAO, J __________________ P. DURGA PRASAD, J Date: 31-01-2011 YCR