Partly allowed

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Dangi Suguna

Telangana HC23 Aug 2012CMA/3697/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this appeal by the insurance company against a motor accident claim petition, the court addressed entitlement and quantum of compensation. The court held that liability exists but reduced the pecuniary compensation based on the deceased being a coolie, resulting in a total award of Rs.2,00,500/-.

What did the court decide?

Compensation re-fixed at Rs.2,00,500/- payable to respondents with interest; original apportionment to be made by lower Tribunal.

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Dangi Suguna — Consumer Protection | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU

¶3

C.M.A.No.3697 of 2003 & CROSS OBJECTIONS (SR) No.58595 of 2003

¶4

DATE:23.08.2012

¶5

Between:

¶6

The New India Assurance Co., Ltd, rep. by Divisional Manager

¶7

…… Appellant And Dangi Suguna and 4 others

¶8

…..Respondents

¶9

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA

¶10

GOVINDARAJULU

¶11

C.M.A.No.3697 of 2003 & CROSS OBJECTIONS (SR) No.58595 of 2003

¶12

JUDGMENT :

¶13

This is an appeal by the insurance company. The respondents 1 to 4 who are claimants filed the claim petition before the lower Tribunal for compensation for the death of Dangi Sakru in a road accident as against claim of Rs.4,00,000/. The lower Tribunal after enquiry awarded total compensation of Rs.3,92,500/-. In this appeal the appellant’s counsel contended that the claimants are not entitled for compensation as the deceased was unauthorised passenger in tractor-cumtrailer and that in any event quantum of compensation awarded

¶14

by the lower Tribunal is highly excessive.

¶15

2) It is alleged that on 28.04.1999 while the deceased was travelling on trailer bearing No.AP 25 E 2716 attached to tractor bearing No.AP 25 E 89 as labourer of owner of the vehicle, the driver drove the same in rash and negligent manner resulting in the vehicle turning turtle resulting in death of the deceased while undergoing treatment in the hospital for the injuries sustained in the accident. At the time of accident, the 1^st claimant/P.W-1 was also travelling in the same vehicle along with the deceased. According to her, they were going in the tractor and the trailer as coolies of the owner. She is an eye witness to the occurrence. There is no contra evidence on behalf of the insurance company. Admittedly the accident vehicle is covered with Ex.A6 insurance policy issued by the appellant. Therefore, the appellant cannot absolve its liability to pay compensation in this case.

¶16

3) Though in Ex.A-3 inquest report avocation of the deceased is shown as agriculture, at the time of accident, the deceased was travelling in the accident vehicle as agricultural coolie. No record is produced to show that the deceased was holding any agricultural land and was doing agriculture of his own and earning agricultural income, except as agricultural

¶17

labourer. The lower Tribunal assessed income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month as an agriculturist. The said assessment is without any basis. The deceased was not having any agricultural land and he was only a coolie. Having regard to the said fact, income of the deceased has to be estimated as an unskilled labourer at Rs.1,500/- per month. If 1/3 income of the deceased is deducted towards his personal expenses, the financial dependency of the claimants comes to Rs.1,000/- per month or Rs.12,000/- per year. For the age of 45 years of the deceased, the proper multiplier is 14. Therefore, pecuniary compensation comes to Rs.1,68,000/-. Apart from that the lower Tribunal awarded non-pecuniary compensation of Rs.15,000/towards loss of estate, Rs.2,500/- towards funereal expenses and Rs.15,000/- towards loss of consortium totalling Rs.32,500/. Total compensation comes to Rs.2,00,500/-.

¶18

4) In the result, the appeal is partly allowed re-fixing the compensation at Rs.2,00,500/- payable to the respondents 1 to 4 with the same interest as awarded by lower Tribunal. The lower Tribunal will make apportionment of the compensation amount and will pass necessary orders for withdrawal of the compensation amount as per the case law on the subject. The appeal in other respects is dismissed. No costs.

¶19

CROSS-OBJECTIONS SR.No.58595 of 2003:

¶20

The Cross-objections are also accordingly disposed of.

¶21

_______________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J

¶22

August 23, 2012 ksh

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Dangi Suguna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Dangi Suguna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Settipalli Raghu Rami Reddy Ex.Mla Vs State of Ap

Kunduru Venkata Rami Reddy, Vs The State of A.P.

Chegodi Ashok Babu Vs The State of a.P., rep. by P.P.

Smt.Kalavathi Vs The State of Ap.

R.Gopi Vs M.a.Rasheed

Vasam Kommaiah Vs Kanukuntla Srinu