JUDGMENT
C.Y. Somayajulu, J.
1. Appellants who are the widow and children of Laxma Bhavji (the deceased) who died due to a collision between the lorries belonging to the Respondents 1 and 3, insured with the Respondents 2 and 4, filed a claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- for the death of the deceased on the ground that he was aged about 45 years and was earning Rs.3,000/- per month as pujari in Gopala Krishna Swamy Temple at Maal. Respondents 1 and 3 chose to remain ex-parte both in the Tribunal and in this Court. Respondents 2 and 4 filed respective counters contesting the claim of the appellants.
2. In support of their case appellants examined two witnesses as PW1 and 2 and marked Exs. A-1 and A-2. No evidence either oral or documentary was adduced on behalf of Respondents 2 and 4. The Tribunal having held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the drivers of the lorries involved in the accident awarded Rs.1,15,000/- as compensation to the appellants from the Respondents. Dissatisfied with the compensation awarded to them this appeal is preferred by the claimants.
3. The only point for consideration is to what compensation are the appellants entitled to?
4. Except the interested oral evidence of PW1 that the deceased was pujari and was earning Rs.3,000/- per month, there is no other evidence to show that the deceased was a pujari and was earning Rs.3,000/- p.m. Since the deceased was a resident of a remote village in Nalgonda District, assuming that he was a coolie, his earnings can be taken at Rs.1,000/- per month and his contribution to the appellants can be taken about Rs.700/- per month or Rs.8,400/- per year.
5. The Tribunal, without taking into consideration Ex.A-2, held that the deceased was aged 45 years, applied 15 multiplier, obviously by taking the aid of Schedule II of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act’). Though this is an appeal preferred by the claimants and there is no cross appeal or cross objection by the Respondents questioning the findings of the Tribunal, this Court can examine and interfere with the findings in favour of the appellants also by virtue of Rule 33 of Order 41 C.P.C. Since, there is no evidence on record to show that the deceased was aged 45 years at the time of his death and since Ex.A-1 and Ex.A-2, which are not disputed, but are relied on by the appellants show that the deceased was aged about 50 years, I am not able to agree with the finding of the Tribunal that the deceased was aged 45 years at the time of his death. As mentioned in Ex.A-1 and Ex.A-2 he was aged about 50 years and so the multiplier can be taken as 10 and so the pecuniary damages payable to claimants would come to Rs.8,400/- x 10 = Rs.84,000/-.
6. Since the first appellant lost her husband she is entitled to loss of consortium of Rs.15,000/- as held by the Supreme Court in GENERAL MANAGER, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs. SUSAMMA THOMAS, 1994 (1) ACJ, 1 case.
7. Since Y. VARALAKSHMI Vs. M. NAGESWARARAO, it is held that in very case of a total accident a minimum compensation of Rs.15,000/- has to be awarded towards non pecuniary damages, in the facts and circumstances of the case an amount of Rs.20,000/- can be awarded to the claimants towards non pecuniary damages.
8. Thus appellants are entitled to Rs.84,000/- + Rs.15,000/- + Rs.20,000/- = Rs.1,19,000/- as compensation for the death of the deceased. The point is answered accordingly.
9. In the result the appeal is allowed in part and the award passed by the Tribunal is modified. An award is passed for Rs.1,19,000/- in favour of the appellants against the respondents jointly and severally with interest at 12% on Rs.1,15,000/- from the date of petition till the date of deposit, as awarded by the Tribunal and with interest at 9% on Rs.4,000/- from the date of award of the Tribunal i.e., 12-11-1998 till the date of deposit into Court with proportionate costs in the Tribunal. The rest of the claim of the appellants is dismissed without costs. First appellant is entitled to the additional amount of Rs.4,000/- awarded by this Court. Parties are directed to bear their own costs in this appeal.