THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY M.A.C.M.A.No.2912 of 2009 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the order, dated 06.04.2006, in O.P.No.770 of 2005 on the file of the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Judge, Karimnagar, wherein the said claim application ﬁled by the appellants herein under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ( for brevity, ‘the Act’), was allowed in part awarding compensation of Rs.85,000/- with interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of the petition. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants. None appeared for the respondents. Perused the record. 3. Appellants herein ﬁled the claim application seeking compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- for the death of their deceased daughter, who died in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 25.03.2005. According to the claimants, on that day, while the deceased was proceeding in an auto from Karimnagar to Kothapalli, an Eicher van bearing No.AP 15 T 6112, driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver, dashed against the auto as a result of which the deceased sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot. It is stated that the deceased was aged 18 years and was working as brick labourer and earning Rs.6000/- per month. The driver of the van remained ex parte. The owner and insurer of the van ﬁled counters opposing the claim. 4. During enquiry before the Tribunal, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A1 to A6 were marked on behalf of the claimants. R.W.1 was examined and Exs.B1 and B2 were marked on behalf of the respondents. 5. 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 van by its driver. The said ﬁnding is not questioned by the respondents by by way of any appeal. The Tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs.85,000/- with interest @ 7.5%p.a. Not satisﬁed with the same, claimants preferred the present appeal seeking enhancement. 6. Claimants pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs.6000/- per month by way of labour work in brick kiln. However, no evidence was adduced in support of the said claim. The Tribunal has therefore taken the notional income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per annum as per the II Schedule of the Act. The Tribunal, however, deducted 2/3rd and has taken only 1/3rd of the notional income into consideration for estimating the loss of dependency. As per the II Schedule of the Act, only 1/3rd is to be deducted towards personal expenses. The contribution of the deceased to the family can therefore be estimated at Rs.10,000/- per annum. As the deceased was unmarried, the age of the mother of the deceased- 2nd claimant was rightly taken into consideration. The 2nd claimant is aged 36 years and the appropriate multiplier is ’15’. Applying the same, the loss of dependency works out to Rs.1,50,000/-. Claimants are also entitled for a sum of Rs.5000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.5000/- towards funeral expenses. Thus, the claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.1,60,000/- with interest @ 7.5% p.a. on the original amount from the date of the petition and @ 6% on the enhanced amount from the date of the appeal. The impugned award is modified accordingly. 7. In the result, appeal is allowed to the extent stated above. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 16th November, 2011 Tsy