Point of law: there is no bar to award compensation in excess of what is claimed, particularly, when the evidence which is brought on record is sufficient to pass such an Award

JUDGMENT :

Ninala Jayasurya, J.

1. This is an appeal filed by the claimants, aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 6.7.2005 in MVOP No. 560 of 2004 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Kurnool (hereinafter referred to as Claims Tribunal), whereunder the Claims Tribunal granted a compensation of Rs. 1,33,000/- as against a claim of Rs. 3,00,000/- made by the claimants.

2. The brief facts that lead to the filing of the present appeal are as follows:

The appellants are wife, children and father of one Pedda Samanna @ Raju (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') who died in a road accident which occurred on 9.5.2004. The appellants/claimants filed the said claim petition inter alia stating that the deceased died in a road accident due to the rash and negligent driving of tractor/trailer bearing Registration Nos. AP-21-U-7586 and AP-21-U-7587 belonging to the first respondent and insured with the second respondent. It is further stated that the deceased was hale and healthy, working as coolie and earning Rs. 4,500/- per month and contributing his entire income for the family. As a result of the death of the deceased, the appellants who are depending on him, lost their source of livelihood and as such entitled to compensation from the respondents being the owner and insurer of the vehicle respectively. The respondents filed their respective written statements contending inter alia that the deceased himself was responsible for the accident, that the deceased was sitting carelessly on the top of the water tank and therefore he fell down which resulted in his death and that the driver of the tractor/trailer was not responsible. It was also pleaded that the driver of the vehicle was not having valid driving license to drive the vehicle. On the basis of the said pleas, it was urged that the claimants are not entitled to the compensation sought for.

3. On hearing the respective parties, the Claims Tribunal formulated the issues for consideration with regard to occurrence of the accident, the reasons for the accident and compensation to which the appellants/claimants are entitled to. In support of their case, the claimants got examined P. Ws. 1 and 2 and Exs. A1 to A5 were marked on their behalf. On behalf of the second respondent/insurance company, R.W. 1 was examined and Exs. B1 to B3 were marked.

4. The Claims Tribunal after appreciation of evidence held that the accident occurred because of rash and negligent driving of the tractor only. Insofar as the issue with regard to quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal, taking into account the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 1,250/- per month, arrived at Rs. 15,000/- as income per annum. The Tribunal deducted Rs. 5,000/- there on towards personal expenses of the deceased and arrived at Rs. 10,000/- per annum as loss of his contribution to the family. Applying multiplier of 10', the Tribunal arrived at the loss of dependency @ Rs. 1,00,000/-. The Tribunal further awarded a sum of Rs. 15,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs. 15,000/- to all the claimants/appellants towards loss of estate, Rs. 2,500/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 500/- towards transportation of the dead body of deceased. Thus, in all, the Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 1,33,000/- towards compensation payable by the respondents and accordingly passed a judgment and decree dated 6.7.2005 for the said sum of Rs. 1,33,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of realization of the amount. The Tribunal further directed, the amount so awarded, shall be disbursed to the claimants/appellants in terms of the apportionment made in judgment and decree, dated 6.7.2005. The Tribunal directed that the said amount has to be paid by the first respondent and the same is to be indemnified by the second respondent respectively.

5. Aggrieved by the Award of Compensation in partly allowing the O.P., the claimants/appellants filed the above a