Judgment:
P. Sathasivam, J.
1. Aggrieved by the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional District Court, Fast Track Court No. V), Coimbatore at Tirupur in M.A.C.T.O.P. No. 656 of 2003 dated 15th February, 2006, the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited, Coimbatore, has filed the present appeal.
2. In respect of the death of one Mandhiri Naicker in a road accident that took place on 25th April, 2003, the respondents herein prayed for compensation of Rs. 6,00,000. The Tribunal, on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, passed an award for a sum of Rs. 1,55,000 with interest at 7.5% from the date of petition till ttMate^Tdeposit. Questioning the same, the Transport Corporation has filed the present appeal.
3. The respondents are represented by Counsel.
4. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant as well as the respondents.
5. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant pointed out that the deceased met with an accident due to his own fault by coming out of the bus, when the bus was in motion. Though the driver was examined as RW 1, the Tribunal preferred to accept the evidence of the eye-witness, viz., PW1. It is not in dispute that it was PW 1, who made a complaint to the police, which has been marked as Ext. P-L There is no reason to disbelieve the version of PW1. On the other hand, as rightly pointed out by the Tribunal, though PW 1 has stated in the departmental inquiry that he was exonerated, no material was placed in support of his stand. Accordingly, we agree with the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal.
6. Coming to the quantum, it is seen from Ext. P-3, Legal Heirship Certificate that the claimants are the legal representatives of the deceased. The post-mortem certificate has been marked as Ext. P-4. The death certificate has been marked as Ext. P-2. It is seen from Ext. P-6 that the deceased is an agriculturist and he used to sell vegetables at 'Uzhavar Santhai', The son of the deceased was examined as PW 3. He has deposed about the avocation and the income of the deceased. Taking note of the age of the deceased as mentioned in the claim petition as well as the postmortem certificate, the Tribunal determined his age a 65 and applied a multiplier of 5. The Tribunal is also justified in arriving at a conclusion that it would be possible for the deceased to earn a sum of Rs. 3,000 per month and after deducting 1/3rd amount towards his personal expenses, fixed the contribution to the family at Rs. 24,000 per year and by applying the multiplier of 5, fixed the loss of income to the family at Rs. 1,20,000 and after adding a sum of Rs. 10,000 towards loss of love and affection to the wife and for the children/claimants 2 to 5, awarded a sum of Rs. 5,000 each, totalling Rs. 20,000 and further added a sum of Rs. 5,000 towards the funeral expenses and thus fixed the total compensation at Rs. 1,55,000. Considering the materials placed, I am of the view that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and there is no ground for interference. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs, Consequently, M.P. No. 1 of 2006 is also dismissed.