The compensation awarded to the dependents of a deceased victim in a motor vehicle accident should be calculated by deducting 1/4 of the deceased's income towards personal expenses and applying the appropriate multiplier based on the age of the deceased.

JUDGMENT

B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi, J. - This appeal is preferred by the 2nd respondent/APSRTC, challenging the award dated 29.06.2015 passed in M.V.O.P.No.191/2013 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Addl.District Judge, West Godavari District, Eluru, wherein the Tribunal while partly allowing the petition, awarded compensation of Rs.7,00,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of petition, till the date of realisation for the death of Lanka Mani Yesu @ Yesu, in a motor vehicle accident.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are arrayed as parties before the tribunal.

3. As seen from the record, originally the petitioners filed an application U/s.166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for brevity 'the Act') claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- on account of the death of Lanka Mani Yesu @ Yesu, in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 20.03.2010.

4. The facts would show that their contention is that on 20.03.2010 when the deceased was travelling on his motor cycle at about 07.30 p.m., near Fish Hatcheries Training Centre on N.H.5 Road, Badampudi village, one APSRTC Bus bearing No.AP27Z 3047 came in a rash and negligent manner in opposite direction, and dashed the deceased, and dragged to some distance causing fatal accident. The deceased was shifted to Government Hospital, Tadepalligudem, but succumbed to injuries while undergoing treatment. A case in Cr.No.63/2010 for the offence punishable U/s.304-A of Indian Penal Code was registered in Chebrole Police Station against the 1st respondent and subsequently, he was charge sheeted.

The deceased was aged about 27 years, hale and healthy, engaged in gunny bags business and earning Rs.10,000/- per month by the date of accident. Due to sudden death of the deceased, the petitioners lost valuable financial support, loss of love and affection. Further, the petitioners are unable to eke out their livelihood and suffering a lot of mental agony. The 1st respondent is driver of the APSRTC Bus bearing No.AP 28Z 3047 and the 2nd respondent is owner of the vehicle. Therefore, both the respondents are liable to pay compensation to the petitioners.

5. Before the Tribunal, the 2nd respondent filed written statement resisting, while traversing the material averments with regard to proof of age, avocation, monthly earnings of the deceased, manner of accident, rash and negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle, liability to pay compensation, and contended that the petitioners ought to have joined the owner and insurance company of the motor cycle, on which the deceased was travelling as they are necessary parties, and the petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. The compensation claimed by the petitioners is highly excessive.

6. The 1st respondent remained exparte before the Tribunal.

7. On the strength of the pleadings of both parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues:

1. Whether the pleaded accident dated 20.03.2010 has occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of APSRTC bus bearing No.AP28Z 3047 by the driver/1st respondent? and whether deceased Lanka Mani Yesu @ Yesu died due to the said accident?

2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation? if so, to what quantum and what is the liability of the respondents?

3. To what relief?

8. To substantiate their claim, the petitioners examined P.Ws-1 to 3 and got marked Exs.A-1 to A-6. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the 2nd respondent.

9. The Tribunal, taking into consideration the evidence of P.Ws-1 to 3, coupled with Exs.A-1 to A-6, held that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of APSRTC Bus, and further, taking into consideration the evidence of P.Ws-1 to 3, corroborated by Exs.A-1 to A-6, awarded a compensation of Rs.7,00,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of petition, till the date of realisation against the respondents.

10. The contention of the appellant/APSRTC is that the accident was not occurred due to