1. The New India Assurance Company Limited, represented by its Regional Manager, Secunderabad, being aggrieved of the compensation awarded in O.P.No.2471 of 2003 on the file of XXII Additional Chief Judge-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, City Criminal Court, Hyderabad (hereinafter in short referred to as “Tribunal” for the purpose of convenience) had preferred the present M.A.C.M.A.

2. Respondents 1 to 6 in the present M.A.C.M.A. as claimants filed the O.P. aforesaid under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter in short referred as “Act” for the purpose of convenience) praying for awarding of compensation of Rs.12.00 lakhs together with interest and costs.

3. The Tribunal, in the light of the respective stands taken by the parties, having settled the issues, recorded the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 and also marked Exs.A-1 to A-6 and Ex.B-1 and ultimately came to the conclusion that the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.7,50,000/- together with interest at 7.5% per annum on the said compensation amount from the date of filing of the petition till the date of deposit. Aggrieved by the same, the present M.A.C.M.A. had been filed.

4. Smt. I. Mammu Vani, learned counsel representing appellant-respondent No.2 had taken this court through the contents of Ex.A-6 and would maintain that the Tribunal totally erred in taking gross salary of the deceased into consideration instead of taking net salary of Rs.4,878/-. The learned counsel also would point out that the Tribunal also had not recorded appropriate findings in relation to the loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses. The counsel also would maintain that the Tribunal ought to have seen that the deceased while crossing the road did not observe both sides of the road and in a way contributed to the accident. The learned counsel while elaborating her submissions had taken this court through the findings which had been recorded by the Tribunal and ultimately would conclude that the said award to be accordingly at least modified. The learned counsel placed strong reliance on certain decisions to substantiate her submissions.

5. Per contra, Sri J. Kanakaiah, learned counsel representing respondents 1 to 6 would maintain that the Tribunal recorded reasons in detail and ultimately came to the correct conclusion. The learned counsel also would maintain that while computing the salary only certain deductions are to be made and the learned Tribunal made such deductions and arrived at a correct conclusion. Since the findings had been recorded on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence available on record in proper perspective, this is not a fit matter to be interfered with. The learned counsel also relied on certain decisions to substantiate his submissions.

6. Heard the counsel on record, perused the oral and documentary evidence available on record and also the findings recorded by the Tribunal.

7. In the light of the submissions made by the counsel on record, the following points arise for consideration in this M.A.C.M.A. (1) Whether the findings recorded by the Tribunal in relation to the income or the salary to be confirmed or to be disturbed in the facts and circumstances of the case?

(2) If so, to what relief the parties would be entitled?

8. Point No.1:

The claimants filed O.P. No.2471 of 2003 aforesaid under Section 166 of the Act, since the deceased S. Venkata Swamy died in a motor vehicle accident which had taken place on 25.7.2003. It is the case of the claimants that on 25.7.2003 about 8-45 p.m. while S. Venkata Swamy was crossing National High Way No.9, a lorry bearing No. ABG 6399 coming from Hyderabad proceeding towards Patancheru came in high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed S. Venkata Swamy. As a result, Venkata Swamy sustained multiple injuries and died on the way to Gandhi Hospital.

9. Police Ramachandrapuram of Medak District registered a case in crime No.170 of 2003 under Section 304-A of IPC against the