( 1 ) THIS appeal relates to the compensation payable on the death of a vegetable vendor and farmer who is aged about 35 years. He was involved in an accident Oil the high-way of Tenali-Nandivelugu. The accident occurred on February, 9-1963, between 9-30 and 10 a. m. the deceased was riding over a cycle and was hit from behind and three days later he died.

( 2 ) HIS father, wife and three minor childeren claimed Rs. 34, 900/- towards compensation. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 9,400/ -. Hence the appeal by the claimants.

( 3 ) IT is seen that deceased was owning land and from out of the vegetables grown in his land, he was vending them and making his livelihood. As he was only 35 yean old. his yearly income was determined as 3,000/ -. From the above facts it is seen from any stand point of view. awarding of compensation of Rs. 9,400/- cannot be justified.

( 4 ) FOLLOWING the principles laid down in the decisions reported in polavarapu Samarojyam and Others vs A. P. S. R. T. Corporation loss of consortium would be Rs. 4,000/- and the balance of the amount even on the basis of the income of the deceased was Rs. 3,000/- as accepted by the lower Tribunal and applying the multiplier and guiding principles in the above decision, they will ba entitled for more than the amount that is claimed. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the Tribunal ought to have granted Rs. 34, 900/- as claimed by the claimants. The appeal is restricted only to Rs. 22,500/ -. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the appellants are entitled to Rs. 22,500- with interest from the date of appeal i. e. , 4-5-76.

( 5 ) AGAINST the State Bank of India, Tenali, who is a financier. the claim was dismissed. We confirm the same though the Bank is again made a respondent in this appeal.

( 6 ) THIS court has been voicing its agony and concern on the persistent rumours about the malpractices percolating in the adjudicatory process by the Tribunals constituted to determine compensation to the victims of motor accidents or other claims under Land Acquisition Act, etc, and its adverse affect on the efficacy of adjudyicatory process and of the confidence by the litigant public in the courts and the rule of law as a whole. As a solution, this court in Polavarapu Somarajyam and Others and Srisailam Devastlianam vs. Bhavani Pramilamma has envisaged the procedure, directing the claimants to open an account in either a nationalised bank or the nearest post office and to furnish the number of the account to the Tribunal. The Tribunals were directed to credit the amount to their credit, except the costs so that the fruits of the result of the adjudication would be reaped by the claimants and thereby the effect on vital veins of the adjadicatory efficacy would be remedied. We are informed that the directions has their salutory effect and the Tribunals are adhering to the same as a rule. Therefore, it has become incumbent to all the Tribunals concerning determinations of the compensation, be they motor Accidents Claims Tribunals or Civil Courts, dealing under the acquisition or requisition Act, etc. to follow the above procedure so that the persistent criticism against the courts would be effectively silenced. Under these circumstances, it must be held that the procedure indicated by this court had transformed into a rule or practice to be followed by all the Tribunals as a matter of law 10 direct the parties concerned to open an account in a nationalised bank or the nearest post office convenient to them and to furnish the number of the account to the tribunal or court and the court or the Tribunal to deposit their respective claims amounts to the said account. Accordingly we hold that this solutary rule or procedure shall be followed by all the Tribunals concerned. In the view we direct that Tribunal shall direct the first and fifth appellants to open savings Bank account either joint account or individual accounts as per their convenience in the neare