IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to re-assess the compensation amount and the influence of legal principles in determining the compensation and interest rate.

JUDGMENT

B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI,J. - Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Tarlada, learned Standing Counsel for the Appellants and Sri Rajesh Maddy, learned counsel for Respondents No.1 to 5.

2. This appeal is preferred by the respondents No.1 to 3/APSRTC, represented by its Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Hyderabad, the Regional Manager, Visakhapatnam, and the Depot Manager, Waltair Depot, APSRTC, Visakhapatnam (in short the APSRTC), U/s.173 of the Motor Vehicles Act (in short, the M.V.Act), challenging the order and decree dtd. 24/7/2013 passed in M.V.O.P.No.1333/2011 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Addl.District Judge, Visakhapatnam (in short, the Tribunal). The learned Tribunal while allowing the claim petition, awarded compensation of Rs.51,64,452.00 with interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition, till the date of realisation, for the death of Gujju Yellayya Reddy in a motor vehicle accident occurred on 24/12/2010.

3. The present Appellants are the respondents No.1 to 3 respectively in MVOP No.1333/2011 before the learned Tribunal; The respondents No.1 to 5 are the claimants; The 6th respondent in the appeal is the driver of RTC bus bearing No.AP 10 Z 7450.

4. The case of the claimants is that on 24/12/2010 at about 13.30 p.m., the deceased Gujju Yellayya Reddy (in short, the deceased) was going on his motor cycle bearing No.AP 31 L 7279 from his office to residence to have lunch; when he reached a place opposite to Sivalayam Temple, Marripalem, Visakhapatnam, RTC Bus No.AP 10 Z 7450 belonging to Waltair Depot came in a rash and negligent manner with high speed without blowing horn; and dashed the deceased vehicle; the deceased fell down and died on the spot; he was shifted to Seven Hills Hospital in 108 ambulance, wherein he was declared dead; hence, the claimants/respondents filed the petition claiming compensation of Rs.47,60,000.00.

5. The Appellants and the 6th respondent contested the claim petition by filing counters; the Appellants and the 6th respondent denied their liability to pay any compensation and prayed to dismiss the claim petition.

6. The Tribunal basing on the rival contentions, framed the following issues:

1. Whether the deceased viz., Gujju Yellayya Reddy, S/o.Appala Narasayya Reddy, died in the motor accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the motor vehicle bearing Regd. No.AP 10 Z 7450 (APSRTC Bus) driven by its driver?

2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to compensation? If so, to what amount and from which of the respondents?

3. To what relief?

7. On behalf of the claimants/respondents, P.Ws-1 to 3 were examined and Exs.A-1 to A-11 were marked. On behalf of the Appellants/respondents No.1 to 3, R.W-1 was examined and no documents were marked.

8. The Tribunal recorded finding on issue No.1 that the deceased died due to injuries sustained by him in the accident, and that the accident was occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the 6th respondent.

9. On issues No.2 and 3, the tribunal determined the age of the deceased as 53 years and his gross income as Rs.33,198.00 per month and Rs.3,98,376.00 (Rs.33,198.00 x 12) per annum. The learned Tribunal considering the number of dependants as five, deducted 1/5 of income of the deceased towards personal and living expenses of the deceased and fixed the monthly income of deceased as Rs.33,198.00 (Rs.41,498.00 8,300). The learned Tribunal also considered the future prospectus on the established income of deceased @ 15% as per the principles laid in the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others,(2017) 16 SCC 680. and fixed the income of the deceased as Rs.4,58,132.00 (Rs.3,98,376.00 + 59,756). The learned Tribunal applied multiplier 11' as per judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma and another Vs. Delhi Road Transport Corporation and others,2009 ACJ 1298. considering the age of deceased in the group between 50 to 55 years. Th