The main legal point established is that the calculation of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act should consider the gross salary for determining annual income and should apply the appropriate multiplier based on the circumstances of the deceased.

(R. BANUMATHI, J.)

1. Being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation of Rs.17,70,000/- awarded by the Tribunal to the claimants for the death of one P.G.Mathew, the State Transport Corporation has filed this appeal.

2. The brief facts are that on 19.05.2001 at about 5.20 p.m., when the deceased Mathew was proceeding in his motorcycle on the Periyar Main Road from north to south, near Sri Devi Vilas Stores, Kovilpathu, the lorry bearing Registration No.TML 5083 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the deceased. In the accident, the deceased sustained severe injuries on his head and multiple injuries all over the body and his vehicle was also completely damaged. Immediately after the accident, the deceased was taken to Government Hospital, Karaikal, where he succumbed to injuries. A criminal case was registered in Crime No.52 of 2001 for the offence under Section 304 (A) I.P.C. The deceased was aged 58 years at the time of accident. The deceased was working as an Assistant Executive Engineer (C&M), Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited and earning a sum of Rs.33,902.46 per month as salary. The deceased was an Ex-service man and he was also drawing pension of Rs.2,999/- per month. He was also an income tax assessee. Alleging that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the appellant-Transport Corporation, the claimants have filed claim petition under Sections 140 and 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation of Rs.30,15,000/- (restricted to Rs.25,00,000/-).

3. In the Tribunal, on behalf of the claimants, first claimant examined herself as P.W.1, the Personnel and Administration Officer of O.N.G.C. was examined as P.W.2 and one Maran was examined as P.W.3. and Exs.P1 to P11 were marked. On the side of the appellant-Transport Corporation, the driver was examined as R.W.1.

4. Upon consideration of oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal held that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver and held that the appellant-Transport Corporation is liable to pay compensation to the claimants. Based upon Ex.P8-salary certificate, the Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.33,902.46 and calculated the annual income at Rs.3,94,595/-. After deducting income tax payable at Rs.84,399/-, the Tribunal has taken the annual income at Rs.3,10,196/-. After deducting 1/3rd amount for personal expenses of the deceased i.e. Rs.1,03,398/-, the Tribunal has calculated the annual loss of dependency at Rs.2,06,798/- (Rs.3,10,196/- - Rs.1,03,398/- = Rs.2,06,798/-). Taking the age of the deceased as 58 years and adopting the multiplier of 8, the Tribunal has taken the total loss of dependency at Rs.16,54,384/- (Rs.2,06,798/- x 8 = Rs.16,54,384/-), rounded off to Rs.16,54,300/-. The tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.17,70,000/-as under:

Loss of annual dependency .. Rs.16,54,300.00

Damages to the vehicle .. Rs. 5,700.00

Funeral expenses and transport

Charges for taking the body of

the deceased to his native place .. Rs. 10,000.00

Loss of love and affection .. Rs. 1,00,000.00

= = = = = = = = =

Total .. Rs.17,70,000.00

= = = = = = = = =

5. We need not elaborate upon the facts, manner of accident, the question of negligence and the liability to pay the compensation fastened upon the appellant-Transport Corporation. It is for the reason that those findings are recorded in favour of the claimants by the Tribunal. Secondly, those findings on the question of negligence is not seriously in dispute in this appeal. Only the quantum of compensation awarded to the claimants is under challenge.

6. Mr.Krishnamoorthy, learned counsel for the appellant-Transport Corporation submitted that the deceased was 58 years at the time of accident and that he had only two more years of service and while so, the Tribunal erred in adopting multiplier 8 and awarding Rs.16,54,300/- towards loss of dependency. It was further submitted