The principles for assessing compensation in motor accident cases were discussed, including the consideration of the deceased's income, personal expenses, and the number of years' purchase to be applied.

R. N. MISRA, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act of 1939 challenging the award of the Second Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dated 3-81977 awarding compensation of Rs. 36,000/- to respondents 1 to 4.

( 2 ) ONE Satyananda Moharana, while proceeding on cycle around noon time on 30-1-1976 from Daragha Bazar to Bhagatpur was knocked down on the road near the Cuttack Central Jail by a truck bearing registration No. RD 22341. That truck belonged to the 1st Orissa Batallion of the National Cadet Corps. As a result of the impact of the collision, Satyananda fell down from his cycle and came under the vehicle. He was removed to the City Hospital and from there to the SCB Medical College Hospital where he was declared to be already dead Respondents 1 to 4 who are his dependants laid claim for compensation of Rs. 50,000/- by alleging that the deceased who was aged about 30 years was having a monthly income of about Rs. 500/ -.

( 3 ) IN the abjection the appellant took the plea that Satyananda was a daily worker and had an income of Rs. 4/- per day. The claim was, therefore, excessive. It was pleaded that the vehicle was, not being driven either negligently or rashly and the accident was the outcome of negligence and fault of the victim himself. The Jail Road was very crowded and the driver of the vehicle was very cautious. When the vehicle reached the gate of the Central Jail, the driver got the feeling that the left rear wheel of his vehicle had run over something. The vehicle was brought to an immediate halt and the victim was found to have been lying on the road. With a view to providing treatment. Satyananda was removed to the hospital where he ultimately died.

( 4 ) THE Tribunal framed three issues, namely (i) whether, the accident was the outcome of rash and (negligent driving of the vehicle; (ii) whether the compensation claimed was high and excessive; and fill to what reliefs the claimants were entitled. Four witnesses were examined on behalf of the claimants while the driver was examined on the respondents' side. On the basis of the evidence on record, the Tribunal came to bold:-

"i am of the view that the driver of the vehicle was rash and negligent in driving the vehicle at the time of the accident and that has resulted in the death of late

Satyananda. "

On the basis of the evidence of P. Ws. 1 and 2, he came to further hold that the daily income of the deceased was Rs. 8/-and he was cm the whole contributing Rs. 4/- a day or Rs. 120/- a month for the maintenance of his dependants. The Tribunal found that the victim was aged about 30 and estimating that he would have been active for a further period of 30 years, the Tribunal worked out the total compensation at Rs. 43,000/-and reducing it by one-sixth in view of the lump sum award of compensation, he estimated the amount at Rs. 36,000/ net.

( 5 ) SO far as the finding of rash and negligent driving of the vehicle is concerned, I find that the evidence is mostly one-sided. P. Ws. 3 and 4 are independent eye witnesses. They have given a detailed picture of how the accident occurred. P. W. 3 is a florist having a shop in the vicinity of the spot of accident P. W. 4 is a carpenter. Both of them have supported the claimants' version of the incident. The sole evidence to rebut comes from the driver of the vehicle. Admittedly, the vehicle had other occupants including an officer of the National Cadet Corps. For reasons best known to the appellant, such evidence has been withheld. The Tribunal, in my view, has come to the correct conclusion toy drawing verse inference that the vehicle was being driven rashly and negligently at the relevant time and the accident was the outcome of such driving.

( 6 ) THE only other aspect to be considered is as to what should be the adequate amount of compensation. The Tribunal, as I have already indicated, found that the contribution of the deceased to the family was Rs. 120/- per month. Otherwise stated, the