IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN Present HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD CIVIL MISECELLANEOUS APPEAL No.311 of 2003 Between: Maggi Manga Tayaru .. Appellant AND Marukurthi Bapi Raju & 2 others .. Respondents The Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD CIVIL MISECELLANEOUS APPEAL No.311 of 2003 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the award in O.P.No.161 of 1999, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- District Judge, East Godavari at Rajahmundry, dated 06.09.2002. 2. The factual background for the appeal is that the appellant’s husband Maggi Krishna Murthy met with a motor accident when his luna was dashed against by lorry No.ADI 2291 on 18.02.1998 at about 12.30 p.m. The lorry was driven rashly and negligently and Maggi Krishna Murthy was declared dead when he was taken to the Government Hospital, Kakinada. Hence, the wife sued the driver, owner and insurer of the lorry for a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-. 3. While the driver and the owner of the vehicle remained ex parte, the insurer put the claimant to strict proof of all her allegations and claimed the accident to be a case of collision between the two vehicles making the owner and insurer of the luna moped also necessary parties. 4. The Tribunal framed appropriate issues on the responsibility for the accident and the quantum of compensation and examined P.Ws.1 and 2 and marked Exs.A-1 to A-4 and Ex.B- 1 during the enquiry. 5. The Tribunal firstly concluded that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry, in the absence of any contrary evidence to the claims of P.W.2 corroborated by the contents of Ex.A-1-Charge sheet and Ex.A-4-First Information Report. While assessing the compensation, the Tribunal fixed the age of the deceased as 38 years and assessed the monthly income at Rs.900/- in the absence of any documentary evidence about the minimum wages at that time. The Tribunal deducted 1/3rd towards the personal expenses of the deceased and on application of multiplier 16 awarded Rs.1,15,200/- towards loss of dependency, Rs.15,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses. The Tribunal awarded interest on the total compensation of Rs.1,47,200/- at 9% per annum and also proportionate costs and gave further directions about the disbursement of the compensation. 6. The claimant approached this Court being aggrieved by the assessment of the probable income of the deceased and the age of the deceased. 7. Heard the learned counsel for both parties. 8. The point for consideration is about the correctness of assessment of the age and monthly income of the deceased by the Tribunal. 9. Even if the age of the deceased were to be taken as 35 years as claimed by the appellant, as per SARLA VERMA AND OTHERS VS. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION[1], the appropriate multiplier is only 16 and the multiplier applied by the Tribunal being 16, the Tribunal assessing the age of the deceased at 38 years caused no loss to the claimant. 10. The assessment of the income of the deceased at Rs.900/- per month or Rs.30/- per day as an agricultural labourer was not shown to be less than the minimum wages payable under the statutory notification under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, at the relevant time and if so, the assessment of such income also is not susceptible to any interference in the absence of any material on record. Deduction of 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased and calculating the loss of dependency thereafter or the grant of other sums of damages by the Tribunal cannot be considered to be unreasonable or improper. 11. Under the circumstances, the impugned award cannot be interfered with and the appeal is dismissed without costs. _____________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date: 31st January, 2011 KL HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD CIVIL MISECELLANEOUS APPEAL No.311 of 2003 Date: 31st January, 2011 KL [1] 2009 ACJ 1298