THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.1599 of 2003 JUDGMENT: The appellants-claimants filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the order, dated 26.08.2002, passed in O.P.No.620 of 1999 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, East Godavari, Rajahmundry. The petitioners, who are the parents of the deceased, filed the present O.P., for the death of their son in an accident that occurred on 17.06.1999 at Ramachandrapuam due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry, bearing Registration No.TN 69B 6599, by its driver. It is stated that the deceased was an Engineering Graduate and was aged 23 years as on the date of the accident. It is also stated that after completion of his Engineering, he started Computer Centre and was earning a sum of Rs.6,000/- per month. Hence, the present claim for Rs.4,00,000/- towards compensation. The first and second respondent, being the driver and owner of the lorry, remained ex parte and the third respondent-Insurance Company filed counter denying the allegations and contending that the compensation claimed is high and excessive. On consideration of the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry by its driver. With regard to the quantum of compensation, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,91,000/- to the appellants-claimants under various heads. Dissatisfied with the said quantum of compensation, the present appeal is filed by the appellants-claimants. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the third respondent-Insurance Company. There is no dispute with regard to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the crime vehicle. The dispute is only with regard to the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Admittedly, the deceased was a B.E., Graduate. Though it is claimed that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.6,000/- p.m. by running a computer center, the Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.2,000/-. But, keeping in view the fact that the deceased was a B.E., Graduate and running a computer center, it can safely be said that his monthly income would be atleast Rs.4,000/-. Therefore, in the interests of justice, I deem it appropriate to take the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.4,000/-. As the deceased was unmarried, as per Sarala Verma (Smt) and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and another[1], 50% has to be deducted towards his personal and living expenses and after deducting the same, his monthly income would come to Rs.2,000/- and Rs.24,000/- per annum. The appropriate multiplier as per Sarala Verma’s case is ‘14’. Therefore, the loss of income to the appellants due to the death of the deceased would be Rs.3,36,000/- (Rs.24,000/- x 14). A sum of Rs.20,000/- is hereby granted towards love and affection and Rs.10,000/- towards loss of estate. In total, a sum of Rs.3,66,000/- is granted to the appellants towards compensation. The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. With the modification as above to the award of the Tribunal, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed in-part. No costs ____________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J. Date:12.08.2010 VGB [1] (2009) 6 SCC 121