THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO C.M.A.NO. 2928 OF 1998 DATED: 18.08.2009 BETWEEN: Smt K.Dhanakoti and others .. Appellants And Smt Saraswathi and another .. Respondents THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO C.M.A.NO. 2928 OF 1998 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the award dated 06.08.2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional District Judge, Chittoor at Tirupathi in O.P.Nos.195, 302, 217, 305, 194, 293, 290 and 296 of 1995. The Tribunal passed common award in O.P.No.194 of 1995 and other original petitions therein. 2. The claimants who are the appellants are the legal representatives of the deceased K.Govindaiah who was aged 23 years at the time of his death in a motor vehicle accident. The appellants filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- on account of death of the deceased. The learned Tribunal having arrived at that the conclusion that the claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.1,36,000/- restricted the award to only Rs.1,00,000/-for the amount which is actually claimed by the appellants in the claim petition. 3. The said award has been challenged by the appellants questioning the findings of the learned Tribunal viz. that the second respondent/insurance company is not liable to pay compensation and also the quantum of compensation. 4. The learned Tribunal basing on the material on record which is not disputed that the deceased and some others were traveling in a lorry which is a goods vehicle in connection with filing of nomination papers of M.L.A. Constituency, Puttur, the said vehicle met with the accident, exonerated the second respondent/insurance company from paying compensation to the appellants/claimants. The said finding cannot be assailed because under the Act as well as in terms of the stipulations of the policy, traveling passengers is prohibited and further the very fact that the deceased and other persons were traveling in the goods vehicle in connection with filing of nomination papers of M.L.A. Constituency, Puttur, it can be safely presumed that the owner must be aware with the said fact. Therefore, evidently there is a willful breach of conditions of the policy by the first respondent. Accordingly, this point is answered against the appellants. 5. The learned trial Court with regard to the fact that accident occurred in the year 1995 and the appellants having failed to prove the avocation and income of the deceased, rightly fixed the income of the deceased at Rs.1,000/- per month, deducted 1/3rd towards personal and living expenses of the deceased and selected the multiplier 17 from the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act which is relevant to the age of the deceased who was 23 years at the time of his death, arrived at the conclusion that the appellants are entitled for compensation of Rs.1,36,000/-. Since the computation of the compensation arrived at by the learned Tribunal is in accordance with law, and also it being just and reasonable, cannot be assailed in the appeal. However, the learned Tribunal ought not to have restricted the compensation to the amount actually claimed in the claim petition by the appellants. 6. Under law, the learned Tribunal can award compensation even in excess to what actually claimed in the claim petition if it is just and reasonable. Therefore, in this appeal, the amount of compensation is enhanced from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.1,36,000/-. Thus, this point is answered in favour of the appellants. 7. Consequently, the finding of the learned Tribunal that the second respondent/insurance company is not liable to pay compensation is confirmed and the amount of compensation is enhanced from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.1,36,000/-. The first respondent/owner of the vehicle alone is liable to pay compensation. The appeal is partly allowed without any order as to costs. ______________ Date:18-08-2009 R.KANTHA RAO, J CCM