K. Ramakrishnan, J

1. The claimants in O.P.(M.V).No.970/2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda, are the appellants herein. The appellants are the brothers and sisters of deceased Jamal, who died in a motor vehicle accident, caused on account of the rash and negligent driving of the vehicle by the 2nd respondent, owned by the first respondent corporation. The claim was filed by the appellants under Section 163 A of the Motor Vehicles Act. The tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the vehicle by the 2nd respondent. Though, the claim was filed originally under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, subsequently, the same was converted into a claim under 163 A of the Act. The tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs. 2,000/- per month, and finding that the appellants are not the dependants of the deceased, deducted 2/3rd from the income of the deceased and awarded a total compensation of Rs. 1,08,500/- as follows:

Sl.No. Head of claim Amount

Awarded Rs.

1 Loss of 104000

dependency

2 Funeral 2000

expenses

3 Loss of estate 2500

Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded, the appellants have come up before this court with the above appeal.

2. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and counsel for the respondents.

3. The counsel for the appellants submitted that, in the case of a claim under Section 163 A of the Act, the tribunal was not expected to calculate the compensation payable on the basis of the dependency of the claimants. Once the death is proved to be due to the user of the vehicle, then the tribunal need only consider the age of the deceased and the income of the deceased and apply the 2nd schedule provided under the Act for the purpose of calculating the compensation, from which 1/3rd has to be deducted for the personal expenses of the deceased and add the conventional amount of Rs.2,000/-under the head funeral expenses and Rs.2,500/- under the head loss of estate are to be added. So, the method of calculation adopted by the tribunal was erroneous and the appellants are entitled to get compensation as provided under the 2nd schedule.

4. On the other hand, the counsel for the respondents submitted that the appellants are the major siblings of the deceased and they cannot be termed as dependants and as such, the tribunal was perfectly justified in awarding the compensation after deducting 2/3rd for the personal expenses of the deceased. The total amount awarded, considering these aspects, is just and proper and there is no need to interfere with the amount awarded by the tribunal is the contention of the respondents.

5. We have considered the rival contentions of both parties.

6. Sections 163 A and 166 of Motor Vehicles Act read as follows:

163A. Special provisions as to payment of compensation on structured formula basis.-

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force or instrument having the force of law, the owner of the motor vehicle or the authorised insurer shall be liable to pay in the case of death or permanent disablement due to accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, compensation, as indicated in the Second Schedule, to the legal heirs or the victim, as the case may be.

Explanation.- For the purpose of this sub-section, “permanent disability” shall have the same meaning and extent as in the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923).

(2) In any claim for compensation under subsection (1), the claimant shall not be required to plead or establish that the death or permanent disablement in respect of which the claim has been made was due to any wrongful act or neglect or default of the owner of the vehicle or vehicles concerned or of any other person.

(3) The Central Government may, keeping in view the cost of living by notification in the Official Gazette, from time to time amend the Second Schedule.

166. Application for compensation.-

(1)