JUDGMENT :

R. THARANI, J.

Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to enhance the award amount in M.A.C.O.P. No. 130 of 2009 order dated 09.11.2011 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Principal District Judge, Ramanathapuram.

1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree passed in M.A.C.O.P. No. 130 of 2009 dated 09.11.2011 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Principal District Judge, Ramanathapuram.

2. The appellants herein are the claimants and the respondents 1 and 2 herein are the respondents in the claim petition. The appellants herein have filed a claim petition in M.A.C.O.P. No. 130 of 2009, claiming compensation for the death of one Jesintha, in an accident that took place on 13.09.2007. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 4,02,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs and Two Thousand only) as compensation. Against which, the appellants have filed the present appeal.

3. A brief substance of the claim petition in M.A.C.O.P. No. 130 of 2009 is as follows:

On 13.09.2007, at about 09.45 a.m. when the deceased was walking along the left side of the road, a bus bearing Registration No. TN-67-N-0239 was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased. The deceased was taken to Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai and she died on 14.09.2007. The deceased was working as a Tailoring Teacher and was earning Rs. 300/- per month and she worked as a Librarian and was earning Rs. 500/- per month. The deceased was an divorcee. The petitioners are dependants of the deceased and they claim a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs only) as compensation.

4. Brief substance of the counter filed by the first respondent herein is as follows:

The first respondent driver drove the vehicle in slow and cautious manner. When the bus was nearing the bus stop, another bus was stationed in the bus stop and passengers were boarding the bus. The first respondent driver after giving signal overtook the stationed bus, at that time, the deceased suddenly crossed the road and she dashed against the bus. The deceased herself is responsible for the accident. The first respondent is not liable to pay compensation.

5. Brief substance of the counter filed by the second respondent herein is as follows:

The second respondent is the brother of the deceased and he brought her up and educated her. He spent a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- for the marriage of the deceased. After divorce, the deceased was taken care of by the second respondent. The second respondent was aged about 55 years and he was depending on the income of the deceased. The second respondent admitted the injured in the hospital and spent for the medical expenses. The father of the deceased died after the death of the deceased. The second respondent has to be allotted a share in the compensation.

6. On the side of the claimants, two witnesses were examined and six documents were marked. On the side respondents in the claim petition, two witnesses were examined and three documents were marked. After considering both the sides, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 4,02,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs and Two Thousand only) as compensation to be paid by the first respondent therein. Against which, the appellant has preferred this appeal for enhancement of compensation.

7. On the side of the appellants, it is stated that the Tribunal ought to have fixed the monthly income as Rs. 6,000/- (Rupees Six Thousand only). The deceased was employed as a teacher and she ought to have earned more than Rs. 6,000/- (Rupees Six Thousand only) per month. The amount awarded for loss of love and affection has to be enhanced. The award under various other heads are to be enhanced. The second respondent is not the legal heir of the deceased. He is not a dependant. He is not entitled for any compensation.

8. On the side of the appellants, it is stated that the deceased was 38 years and she was working