RAM MOHAN REDDY, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal by the offending motor vehicle is, calling in question the judgment and award dated 6-6-2006 in M. V. C. No. 388/2003 on the file of the I Addl. Civil Judge, (Sr. Dn), Bangalore rural District, Bangalore (for short 'mact' ). ( 2 ) ONE Manjunatha Reddy while driving the tractor bearing registration No. AP-07/v-780 to Ramasagara via Bangalore from Tumkur, on NH-4, on 5-9-2003, the lorry bearing Registration No. CAS-2529, driven in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the hind portion of the tractor, due to which Manjunatha Reddy fell down and sustained grievous injuries. The injured was admitted to a private Nursing Home and thereafter shifted to M. S. Ramaiah Hospital where he succumbed to grievous injuries on 13-10-2003, despite treatment. The widow, two minor children and parents of the deceased Manjunatha Reddy moved a petition to recover Rs. 29,73,000/- as compensation for the loss suffered by them. The MACT held that the accident was attributable to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry by tis driver and therefore, the owner and the insurer-appellant were liable to pay compensation. The MACT computed the compensation at Rs. 9,48,000/- and passed an award impugned herein. ( 3 ) THE insurer of the offending motor vehicle contends that the impugned judgment and award is unsustainable on two counts: a) That the MACT fell in error in reckoning Rs. 4,500/- as the monthly earning of the deceased, to determine loss of dependency. b) That the MACT was not justified in awarding Rs. 25,000/-towards pain and suffering. ( 4 ) LEARNED Counsel for the respondents-Claimants seek to sustain the impugned judgment and award as being well-merited, fully justified and not calling for interference. ( 5 ) BEFORE the MACT, the claimants led evidence both oral and documentary to establish that the deceased was a driver by occupation and paid a monthly salary of Rs. of 23,500/- and Bata of Rs. 50/- per day, in all rs. 5,000/- while working under the employer by name V. Venkatesh, S/o. Venkatasway Reddy. Having regard to the fact that the accident occurred in the year 2003, the MACT opined that it was probable for a tractor driver to earn Rs. 4,500/- per month and that the claim put forth by the dependants of the deceased was not an exaggeration and accordingly, reckoning rs. Having regard to the fact that the accident occurred in the year 2003, the MACT opined that it was probable for a tractor driver to earn Rs. 4,500/- per month and that the claim put forth by the dependants of the deceased was not an exaggeration and accordingly, reckoning rs. 4,500/- as the monthly income deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased and taking Rs. 3,000/- as the monthly contribution to the family, applied multiplier 16', to assess Rs. 5,76,000/- as the annual loss of dependency. The appellant is unable to make out a case for interference with the impugned judgment and award reckoning the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 4,500/ -. The first contention must necessarily fail. ( 6 ) INDISPUTABLY, the deceased, in a conscious state was admitted to the Hospital on 5-9-2003 and continued as an in-patient till his death on 13-10-2003. During the said period, the deceased was under the shadow of death and every effort to revive the deceased by medical intervention, at a huge expense, failed. It is in this background of facts that the MACT thought fit to compensate the claimants by award of compensation for pain and suffering. In almost identical circumstances as point out by the MACT in the judgment and award impugned, the Apex Court in the case of N. Sivammal and Others VS. Managing Director, Pandian Roadways Corporation and another, 1985 ACJ 75 approved the award of Rs. 5,000/- towards pain and suffering of the deceased who lived for 19 days after the accident under the shadow of death. In that view of the matter and in the facts and circumstances of he present case, more appropriately when the deceased was an in-patient and underwent five surgical interventions during the period of treatment, no exception can be taken to the award of Rs. 25,000/- towards pain and suffering. The second contention must necessarily fail. In the result, the appeal is unmeritorious and is accordingly rejected. The Registry is directed to forthwith transmit Rs. 25,000/- in deposit to the MACT.