JUDGMENT : (Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, to set aside or modify the order of the Tribunal in M.C.O.P.No.480 of 2008 dated 16.12.2009 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Principal District Court, Pudukkottai, Pudukkotai District.) 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree passed in M.C.O.P.No.480 of 2008 dated 16.12.2009, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Principal District Court, Pudukkottai. 2. The appellant herein is the second respondent, the respondents 1 to 4 herein are the claimants and the fifth respondent herein is the first respondent in the claim petition. The respondents 1 to 4 herein have filed a claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.480 of 2008, claiming compensation for the death of one Arumugam in an accident that took place on 02.05.2007. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,84,800/- (Rupees One Lakh Eighty Four Thousand Eight Hundred only) as compensation. Against which, the appellant has preferred this appeal. 3. A brief substance of the claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.480 of 2008 is as follows: On 02.05.2007, at about 11.20 a.m., when the deceased Arumugam was walking along the left side edge of the Pudukkottai – Alangudi road, the driver of the auto bearing Registration No.TN-55-L-6086 that belong to the first respondent, drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the deceased from backside. The deceased died due to the injuries. The deceased was earning Rs. 4,500/- (Rupees Four Thousand and Five Hundred only) per month as an agricultural coolie and the claimants are the dependants of deceased and they claim a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) as compensation. 4. Brief substance of the counter filed by the second respondent therein is as follows: The accident was not due to rash and negligent driving of the auto driver. The name of the driver was not mentioned in the FIR. The first respondent driver was not having valid driving licence. The age, income of the deceased has to be proved. There was no valid policy and prayed the petition to be dismissed. 5. On the side of the claimants, two witnesses were examined and five documents were marked. On the side of the respondents, one witness was examined and five documents were marked. The age, income of the deceased has to be proved. There was no valid policy and prayed the petition to be dismissed. 5. On the side of the claimants, two witnesses were examined and five documents were marked. On the side of the respondents, one witness was examined and five documents were marked. After the trial, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,84,800/- (Rupees One Lakh Eighty Four Thousand Eight Hundred only) as compensation. Against which, the appellant herein has preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. 6. On the side of the appellant, it is stated that the driver of the vehicle was not having badge endorsement in the driving licence. The vehicle is a commercial vehicle and having no endorsement in the driving licence is a violation of the policy condition. The Tribunal instead of fixing the notional income, has fixed the income Rs.2,700/- per month, which is excessive. 7. On the side of the appellant, it is stated that the vehicle is an auto and a commercial vehicle. The driver is not having endorsement in his license and hence, the company is not liable to pay compensation. 8. On the side of the respondents, it is stated that the classification of the vehicle has to be done on the basis of the unladden weight of the vehicle. If the unladden weight of the vehicle is below 7,500 kg, irrespective of the nature of usage of the vehicle, it is to be considered as a light motor vehicle. The vehicle concerned in this case is below 3,000 kg and it has to be classified only as a light motor vehicle. 9. The only defence raised by the appellant is regarding the non availability of endorsement in the license of the driver of the auto. In the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mukund Devagan v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., reported in 2017 SCC 735 , it is stated that a vehicle below 7,000 kg can be classified as Light Motor Vehicle and endorsement in the license is not necessary. Here, the weight of the unladden auto is only 3,000 kg. As per the above citation, this auto can be classified only as a Light Motor Vehicle and no endorsement in the licence is necessary. 10. The age of the deceased was proved by post mortem report, Ex.P3 and by death certificate, Ex.P4. Here, the weight of the unladden auto is only 3,000 kg. As per the above citation, this auto can be classified only as a Light Motor Vehicle and no endorsement in the licence is necessary. 10. The age of the deceased was proved by post mortem report, Ex.P3 and by death certificate, Ex.P4. On the basis of the evidence of P.W.1, the monthly income of the deceased was fixed as Rs.2,700/- per month. The monthly income and multiplier were correctly fixed by the Tribunal. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal under various other heads are also reasonable. 11. In the above circumstances, the respondents 1 to 4 are entitled to a sum of Rs.1,84,800/- (Rupees One Lakh Eighty Four Thousand Eight Hundred only) as compensation with interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of the claim petition till the date of realization. 12. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. The appellant is directed to deposit Rs.1,84,800/- (Rupees One Lakh Eighty Four Thousand Eight Hundred only) with 7.5% interest from date of the claim petition till the date of realization and the amount if not deposited earlier, has to be deposited within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. On such deposit, the respondents 1 to 4 are permitted to withdraw their respective shares as proportioned by the Tribunal with proportionate interest after deducting any amount received by them earlier without filing any formal petition before the Tribunal. Excess amount, if any deposited shall be refunded to the appellant. The respondents 1 to 4 are not entitled for interest for the default period, if there is any. No Costs.