VENNAPUSA CHENNA REDDY Vs. SANEPALLI SUBBIREDDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In a accident death case the claimants who are the appellants being the father, wife and children of the deceased Chennareddi who died in a motor vehicle accident on 27-8-1988 laid a claim of compensation for Rs. 1,50,000/- under Section 110 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short "the Act") in O.P.No.20/89 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cuddapah and when it was resisted by the respondents who are the owner and the insurer of the vehicle involved in the accident, after an enquiry the Tribunal awarded Rs.45,000/- by way of compensation and Rs.15,000/- said to be under Section 92-A of the Act, in all Rs.60,0007-with 12%p.a. interest and costs. Aggrieved by the award in regard to the adequacy of the compensation the appeal is filed. Respondents, although served with appeal notice have remained exparte.

(2.) The only question involved in this appeal is whether the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is adequate? in assessing the compensation in a death case.

(3.) The evidence as the basis to assess the compensation is found in the testimony of claimant No.l as P.W.I and P.W.2 the pillion rider and Exs. A-l to A-8 the hospital receipts, Ex.A-9 judgment in C.C.No.256/ 89datedl5-12-1988,Ex.A-10certificateof property issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Chapadu, Ex. A-11 certified copy of F.I.R. and Ex. A-12 certified copy of postmortem. The evidence reveals that the deceased was aged 43 years at the time of the accident, he was shifted to more than one hospital and was ultimately shifted to Appollo hospital at Madras where he died after 20 days of the accident. The deceased and the appellants belong to the agricultural family possessing Ac. 16-00 of land wherein the deceased was managing the lands and getting quite a substantial income to the family which is said to be Rs.25,000/- per annum in addition to his income from Mandi commission business. Appellant No.l has testified that his deceased son was earning Rs.30,000/- per annum from all sources including agriculture and business. Appellant No.2 who is the wife of the deceased is aged 40 years; appellantNos.3 and 4 are married daughters, appellantNo.5 who isthe daughter was not married at the relevant time and appellant No.7 was the minor son at the time of the petition. The deceased was also working as Sarpanch having a tractor and after his death the lands were leased out and the tractor was also sold away. Paddy and ground-nuts were being grown in the lands. Appellant No. 1 has testified that Rs.34,0007- were spent towards medical expenses. Exs.A-l to A-8 cover such expenses upto Rs.7,000/-. The Tribunal awarded Rs.7,000/- towards medical expenses; Rs.2,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs.1,000/- towards transport charges and Rs.15,000/- towards compensation under Section 92-A of the Act and the balance is presumed to be towards the loss to the estate or loss of contribution to the family.