JUDGMENT :

This appeal is filed by the claimants, aggrieved of the order and decree dated 15.05.2012 in O.P.No.397 of 2009 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (District Judge) at Nizamabad. By the said order, the learned Tribunal has allowed the O.P. in part awarding total compensation of Rs.2,39,000/- as against the claim of Rs.6,00,000/- made by the claimants.

2. On 09.05.2007, at about 1:00 p.m., the deceased-Mood Chinna Santosh, aged 20 years, while returning home from the agricultural fields on the motorcycle bearing No. AP 15AB 0617 that belongs to respondent No. 1 and when he reached the outskirts of Dathapur Village, the deceased lost control over the motorcycle, dashed to Hider stone by the side of the road and sustained serious injuries on the head. While undergoing treatment at Gandhi Hospital, on 10.05.2007 the deceased succumbed to the injuries. According to the claimants-parents, the deceased was unmarried and earning Rs.10,0000/- per month by doing agriculture and therefore, they laid a claim for Rs.6.00 lakhs under different heads. Respondent No. 2 filed written statement denying all the material allegations made in the petition and put the claimants to strict proof of the same. It is specifically denied the manner of the accident, death of the deceased, age, avocation and income of the deceased. It is also alleged that as the deceased was not possessing driving license, there is breach of terms and conditions under the insurance policy and hence, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation.

3. The Tribunal, considering the claim of the claimants, written statements filed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2, and on evaluation of the evidence, both oral and documentary, allowed the O.P. in part awarding a total compensation of Rs.2,39,000/- along with costs and interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization, to be deposited by the owner of the motorcycle i.e., the respondent No. 1 while dismissing the claim against the Insurance Company i.e., the respondent No. 2 as the deceased was not possessing valid driving license. Challenging the findings of the Tribunal in exonerating the Insurance Company from payment of compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation, the appellants-claimants have filed this appeal.

4. Heard both sides and perused the material brought on record.

5. The learned counsel for the appellants-claimants has contended that the Tribunal has failed to consider the evidence adduced on behalf of the claimants in proper perspective and erred in exonerating the Insurance Company from payment of liability when separate premium was paid for personal accident of owner and driver. It is contended that as per the decision in National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Swaran Singh and Others, (2004) 3 SCC 297, the insurer is under obligation to indemnify the compensation amount payable to the third party and the insurance company may recover the same from the insured. As regards the quantum of compensation, it is contended that at the time of accident, the deceased was earning Rs.10,000/- per month by doing agriculture, but the Tribunal, on assumption, took the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- which is very meagre. With regard to the multiplier, it is contended that by the time of the fatal accident, the deceased was 20 years old, and therefore, as per the structural formula under Section 163A Second Schedule of M.V. Act, proper multiplier applicable in the case on hand is ‘16’ and not ‘13’, as erroneously adopted by the Tribunal, relying on the age of the mother of the deceased. Lastly, it is contended that the amount awarded under the conventional heads such as funeral expenses, loss of estate are meagre and needs enhancement.

6. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2 has submitted that the compensation amount granted by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and therefore, needs no interference by this Court. It is con