Compensation for fatal accidents must reflect a just and reasonable assessment of loss, including considerations for future income prospects and dependants' needs.

1. The claimants filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded in O.P. No. 43 of 2000 on the file of the First Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Nellore.

2. A claim petition under S.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, was filed claiming compensation of Rs. 8,00,000 for the death of one Tatha Suresh. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence on record, awarded a sum of Rs. 6,98,160 as compensation with interest at 9 per cent per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.

3. The facts which led to the filing of the present appeal are in the following paras.

4. The deceased was working as Process Server in Judicial Department and was getting a salary of Rs. 4,935 p.m. On 9.5.1999 at about 2.30 p.m., the deceased was travelling on a motor cycle on NH 9 within the limits of Saroornagar Police Station. At that time, a lorry bearing No. AP 9 - T 8502 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner came from behind and dashed against the motor cycle causing grievous injuries to the deceased resulting in his instantaneous death. The claimant No. 1 is the wife, claimant Nos. 2 and 3 are minor sons and claimant Nos. 4 and 5 are the parents of the deceased. According to them, because of the sudden demise of the deceased, they have lost their sole breadwinner.

5. The owner of the lorry remained ex parte while the insurance company which was shown as the respondent No. 2 filed counter denying the contents in the claim petition. They disputed the relationship between the claimants and the deceased, the manner in which the accident took place, involvement of the deceased in the said accident, the age and income as well as the occupation of the deceased. They further contended that the lorry driver was not having a valid driving licence at the time of accident as such they are not liable to pay any compensation to the claimants. It is further mentioned in the counter that the owner and insurer of the motor cycle are also necessary parties since there was contributory negligence on the part of the driver of the two - wheeler.

6. In order to substantiate the claim, the claimants examined PWs 1 to 3 and got marked Exhs. A1 to A5. The insurance company did not adduce any oral evidence but got marked insurance policy, Exh. B1, on their behalf.

7. The petitioner No. 4 in the O.P. got himself examined as PW 1. PW 2 was examined as an eyewitness to the incident and PW 3 the Central Nazar in the District Court, Nellore was examined to prove the income of the deceased.

8. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence available on record, held that the accident took place because of rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the offending lorry and taking the income of the deceased as Rs. 4,935 awarded a total compensation of Rs. 6,98, 160 as against a claim of Rs. 8,00,000.

9. PW 1, the father of the deceased, was examined to show that the deceased was working as Process Server in the Judicial Department and was drawing Rs. 4,935 p.m. According to him, if the deceased had lived for a long time, he would have got opportunity of getting promotions in his service. Though he deposes as to the manner in which the accident took place, he was not an eyewitness to the incident. He admits that after the demise of his son, his daughter - in - law was given a post in District Court on compassionate grounds at Nellore. According to him, he retired as lab technician in DSR Government Hospital, Nellore and was getting Rs. 3,000 towards pension.

10. PW 2 was examined as an eyewitness to the incident. According to him the deceased was driving