Allowed

Smt B. Shanta Bai and 4 Others v. M/S. Andhra Cement Carriers and Another

Telangana HC2 Sept 2022MACMA/1264/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a motor accident appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the High Court enhanced the compensation awarded to the deceased's wife and children from Rs.2.54 lakhs to Rs.3.02830 lakhs by recalculating annual contribution using Second Schedule multipliers and accounting for funeral and consortium losses.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs.3,02,830 with interest at 7.5% p.a.; respondents directed to deposit amount within one month.

Smt B. Shanta Bai and 4 Others Vs M/S. Andhra Cement… — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

4³²¹⁷ 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶6

M.A.C.M.A. NO: 1264 OF 2012

¶7

Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the order and decree made in M.V.O.P.No.899 of 2010, dated 25-07-2011 on the file of the Court of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Hyderabad

¶8

Between:

¶9

Smt. B. Shanta Bai, Wo. Late B. Tulja Ram, Household R/o. H.No.1F161/3, Kolsawadi Begum Bazar, Hyderabad.

¶10

B. Roopesh, S/o.Late B. Tulja Ram, Mechanic R/o. H.No.1ffi-161/3, Kolsawadi Begum Bazar, Hyderabad.

¶11

B. Suresh, S/o. Late B.Tulja Ram, Mechanic R/o. H.No.1S161/3, Kolsawadi Begum Bazar, Hyderabad.

¶12

B.Mahesh, S/o.Late B. Tura Ram, Pvt. Service Ryo. H.No.'l5S-161/3, Kolsawadi B€gum Bazar, Hyderabad.

¶13

B.Parmesh, S/o. LateB.Tulja Ram, Pvt.Service R/o. H.No.156-161/3, Kolsawadi Begum Bazar, Hyderabad.

¶14

...PETITIONERS

¶15

AND

¶16

M/s. Andhra Cement Carriers, Rep., by its Prop.M.K.Babazia H.No. 15/1256, 1st Road,Sanjeevnagar, Tadipatri,Ananthapur District.

¶17

M/s. The Oriental lnsurance Company Limited,^Rep.,byits Dy. Manager Snehalatha, H. No.6-3-871, P.8.No.45, Greenland Road Begumpet, Hyderabad. Policy No.432490/311201011262 Valid from 18-11-2009 to 17-11-2010)

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

Counsel for the Appellants: SRI U. P.^RAO

¶20

counsel fof the Respondent No.2: sRl P. N.^{A. CHRISTIAN}

¶21

counsel for the Respondent No-1: NONE^APPEARED

¶22

The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

¶23

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI

¶24

MACMA.No.1264 of 2O12

¶25

JUDGMENT:

¶26

Heard Sri U,P. Rao, learned counsel for appellants/ petitioners.

¶27

This appeal has been preferred by the appellants/petitioners seeking enhancement of compensation granted in the decree and award dated 25.07.z9tt in M.V.O.P.No.899 of 2010 passed by the V Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-Mahila Court at Hyderabad.

¶28

The wife and children of Sri B.Tuljaram who died in motor accident filed the claim petition under Section 163A of Motor Vehicles Act, 19BB (hereinafter the M.V. Act) seeking compensation of Rs.7 lakhs.

¶29

The petitioners' case in brief is that on 27.O2.2O1O at about 6 a.m. while the deceased was^proceeding on cycle near Khairathabad cross roads, one lorry bearing registration No. AP-2U-9011 driven (for short 'the lorry')

¶30

MIR,J MACr{A_r 264_2012

¶31

¶32

by its driver in rash and negligent manner and dashed the cycle, as a result he slumped and received grievous injuries and while shifting to the hospital for treatment succumbed to his injuries. The Tribunal on considering the material on record held that the accident occurred due to the negligent driving of the lorry and awarded Rs.2,54,000/- with interest at 7.5olo per annum against the owner and insurer of the lorry/ltt and znd respondents.

¶33

Aggrieved by the quantum of award, the claim petitioners (for short 'the petitioners') tn appeal, contended that the tribunal has erred in considering the evidence as to the income of the deceased and instead of applying the multiplier under Second Schedule, erroneously taken the multiplier proposed in the authority between Bhagwan Das v. Mohd. Arif - AIR 1988 AP 99. Thus, prayed for reassessment and to award^just compensation.

¶34

Nm,l |4ACMA_1264 2012

¶35

¶36

In spite of due notice, the respondents chose to remain silent.

¶37

In this position, the point arises for determination IS:

¶38

"Whether the compensation granted to the petitioners is just and proper and the petitioners has been able to make out any ground for enhancement?"

¶39

The petitioners pleaded that by the date of the accident, Tuljaram/deceased was aged about 52 years and he used to earn Rs.7,000/- as security guard. With regard to age, no specific document is filed. Therefore, considering the entries in the post mortem report/Ex.A-4, the age of the deceased can be accepted at 55 years. To prove the aspect of occupation and income, the petitioners examined Rakesh Kumar/PW-2, Manager tn Security Protection Guards Private Limited Company, Khammam who supported the version of petitioner/PW-1 and also filed salary certificate/Ex.A-6. Having regard to the fact that the claim is under no fault liability and the

¶40

Nm,.) MACMA_1264_2012

¶41

¶42

occupation pleaded, the annual salary could be fixed at Rs.40,000/-. As per Second Schedule, 1/3rd of the income has to be deducted as expenses which the deceased would have incurred towards maintaining himself. Thus the annual contribution of the deceased to the petitioners would be Rs.26,666/-. If this amount is multiplied with the relevant multiplier to the age of the deceased as in the Second Schedule i.e. 11, the total would come to Rs.2,93,3261-, rounded of Rs.2,93,330/-. The petitioners are entitled to this amount towards loss of dependency.

¶43

In addition, the petitioners are entitled for Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.2500/towards loss of estate and Rs.5,000/- for the loss of consortium. Thus, the^petitioners are eligible for the compensation as follows:

¶44

(i) Loss of dependency Rs.2,93,330.00 (ii) Funeral expenses Rs. 2,000.00 (iii) Loss of estate Rs. 2,500.00

¶45

MTR,] MACI4A_ 1264_20 r2

¶46

¶47

t {

¶48

(iv) Loss of Consortium

¶49

Rs. 5,000.00

¶50

TOTAL: Rs.3,O2,83O.OO

¶51

Resultantly, the appeal is allowed as under:

¶52

(i) the petitioners are awarded compensation of Rs.3,02,830/- (Rupees three lakhs two thousand eight hundred thirty only) with interest at 7.5o/o per annum with costs from the date of petition till realization;

¶53

(ii) the 1st and 2nd respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation;

¶54

(iii) the respondents are directed to deposit the awarded amount with interest within one (1) month from the date of receipt of copy of the order;

¶55

(iv) on deposit of the enhanced amount with interest, the petitioners are permitted to withdraw entire amounts as apportioned by the Tribunal;

¶56

NTR,] MACr'rA_1264_2012

¶57

¶58

¶59

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,

¶60

shall stand closed.

¶61

//TRUE COPY//

¶62

sd/-N.sRrH+Rr ASSISTANT REGISTIAR /

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunakum-V Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad(with records)

¶67

One CC to Sri U. P. Rao, Advocate IOPUC]

¶68

One CC to Sri P. N. A. Christian, Advocate IOPUC]

¶69

Two CD Copies

plp

Its)ta-

HIGH COURT

DATED:02/0912022

JUDGMENT

MACMA.No.1264 ot 2012

¶76

3 28 FEB 2tr13
i) ir
{ '.r.j-''' 2

¶77

ALLOWING THE M.A.C.M.A. WITHOUT COSTS

¶78

G r\f
7*t t\x

¶79

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶80

FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶81

PRESENT

¶82

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶83

M.A.C.M.A. NO: 1264 OF 2012

¶84

Between:

¶85

'1. Smt. B, Shanta Bai, W/o. Late B. Tulja Ram, Household R/o. H.No.15-6-161/3, Kolsawadi Begum Bazar, Hyderabad.

¶86

B. Roopesh, S/o.Late B. Tulja Ram, Mechanic R/o. H.No.15€-161/3, Kolsawadi Begum Bazar, Hyderabad.

¶87

B. Suresh, S/o. Late B.Tulja Ram, Mechanic Fyo. H.No.15€-161/3, Kolsawadi Begum Baza r, Hyderabad.

¶88

B.Mahesh, Sio.Late B. Tulja Ram, Pvt. Service R:/o. H.No.15-6-161/3, Kolsawadi Begum Bazar, Hyderabad.

¶89

B.Parmesh, S/o. LateB.TuUa Ram, Pvt.Service R/o. H.No.15€-161/3, Kolsawadi Begum Bazar, Hyderabad.

¶90

...PETITIONERS

¶91

AND

¶92

'l- M/s. Andhra Cement Carriers, Rep., by its Prop. M.K. Babazia H No 15/1256, 1st Road,Sanjeevnagar, Tadipatri,Ananthapur District.

¶93

M/s- The Oriental lnsurance Company Limited, Rep., by its Dy. Manager Snehalatha, H.No.6-3€71,P.B.No.45, Greenland Road Begumpet,Hyderabad. Policy No.43249013112O1011262 Valid from^{'18-'l'l-2009} to^'17-11-2010)

¶94

...RESPONDENTS

¶95

Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the order and decree made in M.V.O.P.No.899 of 2010, dated 25-07 -2011 on the file of the Court of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunat-cum-V Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Hyderabad

¶96

ORDER: This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and the material^papers in the M.V.O.P. and upon hearlng the arguments of Sri U.P.Rao, Advocate for the Appeilant and of Sri P.N.A. Christian, Advocate for the Respondent No.2, and of the Respondent No.1 not appeared either in person or by Advocate

¶97

This court while allowing the M.A.c.M.A doth Judgment and decree as follows:

¶98

That the petitioners be and hereby are awarded compensation of

¶99

Rs.3,02,830^ with interest at^7.syopet annum without costs from the date of petition till realization;

¶100

That the 1"tand 2nd respondent are^jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation;

¶101

That the respondents be and hereby are directed to deposit the awarded amount with interest within 1 month from the date of receipt of copy of the order,

¶102

That on deposit the enhanced amount with interest, the petitioners be and

¶103

hereby are permitted to withdraw entire amounts as apportioned by the tribunal, and

¶104

That there shall be no order as to costs in this M.A.C.M.A.

¶105

//TRUE COPYI/

¶106

sd/-N.sRtHARl ASSISTANT REGTST/RAR ., / tl SECTION OFFICER

¶107

To, 1 The Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-qlm-V Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad

¶108

Two CD Copies

\Vr

HIGH COURT

DATED:02/0912022

DECREE

MACMA.No.1264 ot 2012

¶114

ALLOWING THE M.A.C.M.A. WITHOUT COSTS

¶115

Smt B. Shanta Bai and 4 Others v. M/S. Andhra Cement Carriers and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt B. Shanta Bai and 4 Others v. M/S. Andhra Cement Carriers and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The National Insurance Company Limited Vs Korutla Krishna Veni and 3 Ors.

M/S United India Insurance Company Limited, Hyderabad. Vs Smt. Jakia Begum and 5 Others

Smt. Mudavath Nanku and 5 Others Vs Shivaji and Another

M/S Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., Vijayawada. Vs Velpula Nirmala and 5 Others

Iffco-Tokio General Insurance Co.Ltd., Vs Gundla Madhu , Mycale

Jinnareddy Kantha Reddy Vs M/S Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., and Another