The appellant appealed the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal award against the mother of deceased victims in a vehicular accident, seeking enhanced compensation due to incorrect multiplier application and cost considerations.
Enhanced compensation awarded by allowing part of the appeal; remaining claims dismissed; no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO
MACMA NO. 2214 OF 2006
DATED: 15.02.2012
Between:
D.Laxmaiah and another
.. Appellants
And
Syed Mustaq Hussain and another
.. Respondents
THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO
MACMA NO. 2214 OF 2006
JUDGMENT:
Heard D.L.Pandu, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri Naresh Byrapaneni, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. This appeal is filed by the claimants against the order dated 10.11.2004 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- I Additional District Judge, Mahaboobnagar in O.P.No.205 of 1998 seeking enhancement of compensation.
3. According to the petitioners, the deceased D.Ravinder and Ravi Prakash while going on scooter, a lorry bearing No. AP 12 T 5619 driven in a rash and negligent manner came from behind and hit their scooter on 14.10.1997, due to which, the deceased D.Ravinder and the pillion rider Ravi Prakash died on account of the injuries sustained by them.
4. The deceased D.Ravinder aged 22 years was working as Physical Education Teacher in Unic Public School, Balanagar, Hyderabad. He was drawing salary of Rs. 3,500/- per month. The deceased was unmarried and the claimants are his parents. Learned Tribunal wrongly applied the multiplier ‘11’ instead of the multiplier ‘14’
which is relevant to the age of the mother of the deceased (45 years). The monthly income of the deceased was Rs.3,000/- and his annual income comes to Rs.3000/- x 12 = Rs.36,000/-. From this, half of the amount has to be deducted towards his personal and living expenditure which comes to Rs.18,000/-. If the above said amount is capitalized with multiplier ’14, the loss of dependency comes to Rs.18,000/- x 14 = Rs.2,52,000/-. This apart, the claimants are entitled for an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards loss of estate and further sum of Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses. In all, the claimants are entitled for Rs.2,62,000/- as compensation. The learned Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.2,02,000/-. Therefore, the enhancement would be Rs.2,62,000/- minus Rs.2,02,000/- = Rs.60,000/-. The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation.
5. With the above enhancement in the compensation amount, the appeal is partly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
___________________ Date: 15.02.2012 R. KANTHA RAO, J kvrm
THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO
MACMA NO. 2214 OF 2006
DATED: 15.02.2012
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal was correct in applying a multiplier of 11 instead of 14 for the loss of dependency.
Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal required enhancement to account for higher expenses.
D.Laxmaiah and another
Syed Mustaq Hussain and another
R. KANTHA RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
