IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT : : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD M.A.C.M.A No.523 of 2007 Dated:29-08-2011 Between: Kola Ganniki Rao and another. ….Appellants. And D.Venkatesh and others. ….Respondents. The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD M.A.C.M.ANo.523 of 2007 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice P.Durga Prasad) This appeal is filed at the instance of claimants directed against the award passed in O.P.No.1187 of 2002 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - cum – Principal District Judge, East Godavari at Rajahmundry on 27.09.2006. The petitioners are the parents of the deceased Kola Radha Krishnan and they have filed the claim application for compensation of Rs.1,00,00,000/-. According to the petitioners, the deceased Kola Radha Krishnan was an engineering graduate in Computer Science and working in G.E. Global Technology Solutions Limited, Bangalore on basic salary of Rs.53,970/- per month and that he got offer from Satyam Computers Services Limited with a pay of not less than Rs.8,64,700/- per annum besides other benefits. The deceased accepted the said offer and he was about to report to duty after 12.08.2002. On 11.08.2002 while the deceased was going in his Maruthi Zen Car bearing No. KA 02 2622 by driving the car and reached Raikal bridge on NH 7 road and that the 2nd respondent drove the lorry bearing No. TN 29-2319 in rash and negligent manner at high speed in the opposite direction and dashed the Maruthi Zen Car of the deceased, as a result of which the deceased died on the spot. The 1st respondent, who is the owner and 2nd respondent, who is the driver of the said lorry remained exparte. The 3rd respondent, who is the insurer of the said lorry, has filed counter denying the averments made in the petition and pleaded that the petitioners are not entitled to any compensation against the respondents and sought for dismissal of the petition. The 4th respondent, who is the insurer of the car of the deceased, has filed counter stating that since the deceased himself is the insured, there is no legal obligation on them to pay any compensation to the petitioners. On the above pleadings, the Tribunal has framed the following issues: (1) Whether the deceased Radha Krishan Kola died in motor accident occurred on 11.08.2002 at 6.30 A.M at Raikal Bridge on NH 7 road, Shadnagar of Mahabubnagar District due to the rash and negligent driving of lorry bearing No.TN 29-2319 by the 1st respondent? (2) Whether the petitioners being the dependants of the deceased Radha Krishnan Kola, are entitled to the compensation of Rs.1,00,00,000/- with interest thereon from all the respondents with joint and several liability? (3) To what relief? The 1st petitioner examined himself as P.W.1 and also examined P.Ws.2 to 5 on their behalf and got marked Exs.A.1 to A.23. No oral evidence was adduced on behalf of respondent Nos.3 and 4 and Ex.B.1 copy of the policy was marked on behalf of the 3rd respondent. Taking into consideration of the said oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has held issue No.1 in favour of the petitioners holding that the accident was occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry bearing No.TN 29 2319. With regard to issue No.2 Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.15,87,774/-, which includes loss of dependency of Rs.15,72,774/- and non-pecuniary compensation of Rs.15,000/-. Aggrieved by the said award and decree, the claimants have filed the present appeal for enhancement of the compensation. Learned counsel for appellants has pleaded that the deceased has got offer from Satyam Computers Services Limited with a pay of Rs.8,64,700/- per annum and the same has to be taken into consideration. He further pleaded that when the deceased was about the join in the said company, he died in the accident, as such the said amount of Rs.8,64,700/- has to be taken as income of the deceased, basing on which the dependency of the deceased has to be calculated. According to the petitioners as on the date of accident, the deceased was working in G.E. Global Technology Solutions Limited, Bangalore. As per the pay slip of the deceased Ex.A.15 for the month of July, 2002, he is getting gross salary of Rs.51,136/- and net salary of Rs.37,447/- after deductions of provident fund, income tax etc. The Tribunal has taken into consideration of the net salary of the deceased at Rs.37,447/- per month into consideration and arrived at the annual income as Rs.4,49,364/- per year and after deducting 50%, the loss of dependency of the petitioners was arrived at Rs.2,24,682/- per year and as the age of the 1st petitioner as 55 years and the age of 2nd petitioner as 48 years and taking the average of their ages applied multiplier of 6.855 rounded to ‘7’ and arrived total loss of dependency at Rs.15,72,774/-. Learned counsel for appellants seeking for taking into consideration of the salary offered by the Satyam Computers Services Limited for arriving the loss of dependency of the petitioners. Admittedly, the deceased has not joined in the said company. P.W.5 Senior Executive H.R Department, Satyam Computers, Bangalore, who gave Ex.A.6 offer letter, in cross- examination, stated that he could not able to say whether the deceased has given his acceptance for the said offer made by them. Even as per Ex.A.5 the deceased has to communicate his acceptance to the offer made by Satyam Computer Services Limited before joining and there is no evidence to show that the deceased has communicated his acceptance to the said offer given by Satyam Computers Services Limited, as such the salary offered by the said Satyam Computers Services Limited cannot be taken into consideration in arriving at the loss of dependency of the petitioners. Admittedly, the deceased is working in G.E.Global Technology Solutions Limited, Bangalore as on the date of accident. As per the evidence of P.W.2, Accounts Manager of the said company, the deceased was drawing gross salary of Rs.51,136/- per month and net salary of Rs.37,447/-, after deducting provident fund, income tax etc. As per the decision rendered in “Smt. Sarla Verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and another (2009 AIR SCW 4992)” only income tax and profession tax are liable to be deducted from the salary. As per Ex.A.15, an amount of Rs.11,269/- per month is being deducted towards income tax and Rs.200/- per month towards profession tax. Thus, an amount of Rs.11,469/- has to be deducted from the gross salary of the deceased, which comes to (Rs.51,136 – Rs.11,469) Rs.39,667/-. Since the deceased is a graduate in computer sciences as per Ex.A.16 and he has got a better offer from Satyam Computers Services Limited as on the date of his death, he has got better prospects in his future life. As per Smt.Sarla Verma’s case (referred supra) 50% of the salary drawn by the deceased has to be taken into consideration for the purpose of future prospects of employment. Thus, the income of the deceased comes to Rs.59,500/- (Rs.39,667 + Rs.19,833 = Rs.59,500/-). Since the deceased is unmarried the petitioners being the parents, they are only entitled for 50% toward loss of dependency, which comes to Rs.29,750/- per month. Since the mother of the deceased is aged about 48 years, the appropriate multiplier applicable as per Smt.Sarla Verma’s case (referred supra) is ‘13’. Thus, the total loss of dependency comes to Rs.29,750 X 12 X 13 = Rs.46,41,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.15,000/- towards non- pecuniary compensation, we do not want to interfere with the same. Thus, the petitioners are entitled for total compensation of Rs.46,56,000/- with interest at 6% P.A. on the enhanced amount. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.46,56,000/- from Rs.15,87,774/- with interest at 6% P.A. on the enhanced amount from the date of filing of the petition till the date of realization. _______________________ JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA. _____________________________ JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD Dated:29-08-2011 Ksp