THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTI CE RENUKA YARA M.A.C.M.A.No.623 OF 2023 JUDGMENT:-

Heard Sri P.Chandramouli, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri V.Venkatarami Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

Perused the record.

2. This is an appeal preferred by the appellants/claimants aggrieved by the order, dated 30.11.2022 passed in M.V.O.P.No.1963 of 2018 by the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- XI Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad (for short, ‘the Tribunal’), wherein an amount of Rs.36,85,000/- was awarded in a claim petition filed seeking compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- payable by the respondent Nos.1 to 3 jointly and severally.

3. The claim petition was filed due to the death of one Islavath Naresh @ Narender in a road traffic accident. Appellant No.1 is the wife, appellant No.2 is the mother, appellant No.3 is the father and appellant Nos.4 and 5 are the younger sister and brother of the deceased. The deceased was earning Rs.15,000/- per month as a Supervisor in M/s.Shiva Shankara Filling Station (Bharat Petroleum). Further, he was doing real estate business and used to earn upto Rs.30,000/- per month and therefore, he was earning Rs.45,000/- per month. On 23.04.2018 at 11:30 hours when the deceased was riding Pulsar motorcycle from Keesara side towards Botimidi Thanda Village side and when he reached near Ratnapur Village, Bommalaramaram Mandal, Yadadri, Bhongir District, the driver of lorry bearing No.TS 12 UA 0456 proceeding from Bommalaramaram Mandal towards Keesara side driven in a rash and negligent manner without following traffic rules came in opposite direction and dashed the motorcycle, which lead to death of the deceased on the spot. The police filed Criminal Case against respondent No.3, who was the driver of the lorry, under Section 304-A of IPC. The claimants have sought compensation due to the death of the deceased at Rs.50,00,000/- with interest at 18% per annum.

4. The appellants got examined P.Ws.1 to 4 and got marked Exs.A1 to A7 and Ex.X1. Respondent No.2 did not lead oral evidence but exhibited Ex.B1-attested copy of the policy. On the basis of evidence adduced by the appellants, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.36,85,000/-. Aggrieved by the said order, the present appeal is preferred.

5. In grounds of appeal, it is contended that the appellants are entitled to compensation of Rs.1,19,50,500/-, whereas the Tribunal awarded only Rs.36,85,000/-. The Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- by not considering his income from real estate business and selling of vegetables. The future prospects are taken at 40% which according to the appellants, the same has to be 50%. Further, the appellants claimed compensation towards loss of mobile, mental shock and loss of expectancy of life. Lastly, the appellants sought interest at 12% per annum on the compensation awarded.

6. Coming to the aspect of monthly income of the deceased, the FIR itself reveals that the deceased was doing private job working in Bharat Petrol Bunk at Keesara. The entire police record reflects the avocation of the deceased as Supervisor in a petrol bunk viz., M/s.Shiva Shankara Filling Station (Bharat Petroleum). The witness P.W.4 who was Accountant of said Filling Station deposed that the deceased was paid consolidated salary at Rs.15,000/- as Supervisor of the petrol bunk. Therefore, the income of the deceased is taken at Rs.15,000/- by the Tribunal with multiplier ‘18’ as the age was 23 years, deducted 1/4^th of his income as he had wife, parents and siblings with addition of 40% towards future prospects as he was a private employee. The multiplier is taken on the basis of Sarla Varma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009)6 SCC 121 and the future prospects are taken on the basis of the principles laid down in National I nsurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and others, 2017 ACJ 2700. The appellants claimed the income of the deceased to be Rs.45,000/- without any

basis. On one hand,