( 1 ) THIS is a claimants' appeal against the judgment and award dated 26. 9. 1996 passed by District Judge and M. A. C. T. , Chitradurga, in M. V. C. No. 19 of 1994.

( 2 ) THE appellants are respectively the widow, three children and mother of one govinda Setty. The said Govinda Setty was a partner of firm M/s. Bellary Venkataswamy Setty carrying on business at davangere. On 10. 10. 1993, when the said govinda Setty, along with his family members, was travelling in a car bearing No. KA 17-M 2911 from Bangalore to Davangere, the said car dashed against a parked lorry resulting in the death of the said Govinda Setty. Feeling aggrieved, the widow, children and mother of the said Govinda setty filed M. V. C. No. 19 of 1994 against the driver, owner and insurer of the car, claiming a compensation of Rs. 35,00,000 alleging that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the car.

( 3 ) THE petition was resisted by the respondents contending that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the car; that the accident occurred when the driver of the car tried to avoid collision with a vehicle coming from the opposite side, by swerving to the left and that in that process, it dashed against the parked lorry. The respondents also contended that the compensation claimed is excessive. On the basis of the pleadings, the Tribunal framed appropriate issues regarding negligence, entitlement and quantum of compensation.

( 4 ) COMMON evidence was recorded in m. V. C. No. 19 of 1994 and connected claim petitions arising from the said accident. The widow of the deceased was examined as PW 1 and an official from the income Tax Department was examined as pw 4. Two other occupants of the car who were eyewitnesses to the accident were examined as PW 2 and PW 3. Exhs. P-1 to P-118 were marked on behalf of the petitioners in all the cases.

( 5 ) AFTER appreciating the evidence, the tribunal, by a common judgment dated 26. 9. 96, allowed M. V. C. No. 19 of 1994 in part. It held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the said car by its driver; and that Govinda setty died in the said motor accident and the respondents were liable to pay the compensation to the claimants who are legal heirs of the deceased Govinda Setty. The tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 2,16,000 as compensation (with interest at 6 per cent per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment) arrived at as follows: (a) Loss of dependency (b) Loss of consortium (c) Funeral expenses (d) Loss to estate rs. 3,96,000 Rs. 10,000 Rs. 5,000 Rs. 5,000 rs. 4,16,000 less: one-third of the life insurance amount of Rs. 6,00,000 received by the family of the deceased rs. 2,00,000 total rs. 2,16,000

( 6 ) FEELING aggrieved, claimants have filed this appeal contending that the compensation awarded is inadequate. They contend that the deduction of Rs. 2,00,000 from the compensation, on account of receipt of life insurance amount, is contrary to law. They also contend that the loss of dependency calculated by taking the contribution by the deceased as Rs. 3,000 per month is erroneous. According to appellants, the annual income of the deceased should have been taken as Rs. 1,55,995 (made up of Rs. 48,000 being the salary and Rs. 71,639. 12 being the share in the profits from M/s. Bellary Venkataswamy setty and Rs. 27,045 being the salary and rs. 9,310. 86 being the share in profits from M/s. Padmavathi Commercials ). The claimants contend that even if one-third of the said amount is deducted towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, the contribution to the family would have been Rs. 1,03,996 per annum and by applying a multiplier of 13, the total loss of dependency will be Rs. 13,51,948 ; and by adding amounts awarded under conventional heads aggregating to Rs. 20,000 the total compensation to which the claimants-appellants will be entitled is Rs. 13,71,948.

( 7 ) AS this is a claimants' appeal, the finding reg