The compensation payable to the legal representatives of a deceased victim in a motor vehicle accident should be determined on the basis of the loss of dependency suffered by the legal representatives, and the multiplier principle should be applied to determine the lump sum compensation.

RAMASWAMY, J.

( 1 ) THIS civil Miscellaneous appeal arises against the order of the Motor vehicles accidents claims tribunal (district judge) at Guntur dated 28-9-1976 in O. P. No. 91 of 1974 here is an instance where due to callous indifference to duty and disregard to value of human life long span of precious life of a cyclist aged about 30 years was brought to an abrupt end on 27-9-1973 by rash and negligent driving of a motor vehicle by R. W. 1. The applicants are claimants. They laid their claims under S. 110-B. Motor vehicles Act (Act 4 of 1939) hereinafter referred to as "the Act". For a just compensation in a sum of Rs. 38. 400 for loss of their dependency due to the death caused to one Sri P. Prakasam. Resident of Yadlapalli village tenali taluk Guntur District. The first appellant the widow aged about 24 years 3rd 4th and 5th appellants sons aged about 10, 8 and 4 years respectively and 6th appellant the father aged about 60 years are his legal representatives.

( 2 ) THE case of the appellant is that on 27-11-1973 while Sr. P. Prakasam was going on a cycle on guntur-tenali road, when he was near Angalakuduru and was proceeding on the left side of the road at about 7 P. M. the bus APZ 5040 belonging to the respondent-Andhra pradesh state Road transport corporation hereinafter called for brevity the corporation came at a high speed without blowing horn and hit the deceased from behind and ran over him as a result, the deceased sustained fatal injuries on the right thigh and pelvic region. When he was taken to the Government Hospital Tenali he died in the hospital In the course of the same transaction the cycle on which the deceased was riding was badly damaged. On account of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the said vehicle the deceased met with premature death though he is aged about 30 years with robust health. According to the appellants, he was earning a sum of Rs. 200 per month at the time of the death. Therefore they got issued a notice Ex. A-1 dated 27-5-1974 to the corporation calling upon them to pay compensation in a sum of Rs. 40,400 since the corporation did not make payment thereof they were driven to lay the claim.

( 3 ) THE appellants laid their claim as follows:- "1. Pecuniary loss sustained as legal representatives-cum- dependants of the deceased: 1st appellant (widow) aged 24 years11. 500-00 2nd appellant (daughter) 12 years 3. 500-00 3rd appellant (son) 10 years 3. 500-00 4th appellant (son) 8 years 3. 500-00 5th appellant (son) 4 years 4,000-00 6th appellant (father) 60 years 2,000-00 2. Loss of consortium to the 1st appellant 5. 000-00 3. Loss to the estate viz. Loss of expectation of life of deceased and mental pain and suffering to appellants 5. 000-00

( 4 ) COST of damages of cycle 400-00 _______________ Total Rs. 38,400-00" _______________ 4. The respondent filed its counter denying the allegations made by the appellants. It is alleged that the driver slowed down the speed on seeing the cyclist and he blew horn and on finding enough clearance, the driver drove the vehicle cautiously but the deceased unexpectedly jumped from the cycle falling down on the left side burn portion of the road as he lost his balance as a result the cycle came underneath the bus. In spite of applying the brakers and stopping the vehicle the cyclist was dragged on the hard surface of the road the contention thus set up is that the death of the deceased is not as a result of the rash and negligent driving of the driver. It is further contended that the deceased 6th appellant is not the legal here and he did not suffer any loss. The claim is exaggerated therefore the petition has to be dismissed.

( 5 ) IT is not now in dispute that the police laid a charge-sheet against the driver sri B. Sivaramakrishna examined in this case as R. W. 1 under S. 304 -A of I. P. C. and that he was convicted for rash and negligent driving and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five months but on appeal