Compensation in motor accident cases must reflect accurate income assessments considering future earning potential and age-based multipliers, enhanced from Rs.3,37,200 to Rs.8,20,000.

JUDGMENT :

B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO, J.

1. This memorandum of Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘MV Act’) assailing the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (1^st Additional District Judge) at Nizamabad (for short ‘the Tribunal’), in O.P.No.655 of 2000 dated 04.02.2005.

2.1 Appellants are the petitioners and respondents are the respondents before the Tribunal.

2.2 It is mentioned in the cause title of the appeal that the respondent Nos.1 and 2 remained ex-parte before the Tribunal, hence they are not necessary parties to the appeal.

3. Appellant No.1 – petitioner No.1 is the wife, appellant Nos.2 and 3 – petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are the parents and appellant Nos.4 and 5 – petitioner Nos.4 and 5 are the children of the deceased Machkuri Bhumaiah.

4. Appellants - petitioners have filed petition under Section 166 (1)(C) of the MV Act read with Rules 455 of A.P.Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 claiming compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 24% per annum on account of the death of Machkuri Bhumaiah S/o. Machkuri Sailoo on 03.06.2000 at Jagannathpally village, Bichkunda Mandal.

5.1 It is stated in the O.P. that on 03.06.2000 Machkuri Bhumaiah was proceeding on his cycle from Madnoor towards Pitlam, when he reached Jagannathpally village, on Nanded – Hyderabad road, at about 11.30 a.m. the DCM van bearing No.AP- 31-U-559 being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner came from opposite direction and dashed Machkuri Bhumaiah, due to which, he fell down and front wheel of the van ran over the head and died on the spot. On the complaint, Police Bichkunda has registered a case in Crime No.32 of 2000 under Section 304 -A of IPC against the driver of the vehicle.

5.2 Deceased Machkuri Bhumaiah was an agriculturist and was earning an amount of Rs.6,000/- per month and prayed to grant compensation of Rs.4,00,000/-.

6.1 Respondent Nos.1 and 2 remained ex-parte before the Tribunal.

6.2 Respondent No.3 has filed its counter and denied the manner in which the accident has occurred. It is contented that the driver of the van is a necessary party to the petition, compensation claimed is excessive and prayed to dismissed the same.

7. The learned Tribunal has framed the following issues:

1. Whether the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of the Van bearing No.AP-31-U-559 by its driver?

2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation. If so, to what amount and against which of the respondent?

3. To what relief?

8. Appellant No.1 – petitioner No.1 is examined as PW1, also examined PW2 - Bhumaiah, PW3 - Vittal and got marked Exs.A1 to A7. Respondent No.3 – petitioner No.3 did not adduce any evidence and got marked Ex.B1-policy.

9. The learned Tribunal after analyzing the evidence adduced by the appellants – petitioners coupled with Exs.A1 to A7 and Ex.B1 has awarded compensation of Rs.3,37,200/- with proportionate costs and interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization holding respondent Nos.1 and 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. O.P.against respondent No.2 is dismissed.

10.1 Learned counsel for the appellants – petitioners submits that the Tribunal did not properly consider the evidence of PW1 to PW3 and exhibits marked thereon. The Tribunal ought to have granted compensation as prayed for in view of the fact that the deceased was aged about 26 years as on the date of accident and not 36 years. The Tribunal erred in coming to a conclusion that the deceased was not carrying on agriculture and not earning a sum of Rs.6,000/- per month even though evidence was let in to that effect. The Tribunal erred in taking the income of the deceased as Rs.2,400/- per month instead of taking it at Rs.6,000/- per month. Further, the Tribunal ought to have granted interest at the rate of 12% per annum instead of 9% and prayed to enha