Allowed

M.R.Chandra Shekar and Anr. v. M/S.Road Carrier of India and Anr.

Telangana HC16 Jun 2023MACMA/1662/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the motor accident miscellaneous appeal filed by a minor's parents against the Tribunal's award. The Court enhanced the compensation granted from Rs. 1,55,000 to Rs. 5,63,600 by recalculating notional income, applying future prospects, and awarding a head for loss of estate and filial consortium where the claim was merit.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced from Rs. 1,55,000 to Rs. 5,63,600 including future prospects, funeral charges, and loss of estate; interest @ 7.5% p.a. awarded.

M.R.Chandra Shekar and Anr. Vs M/S.Road Carrier of… — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

il il

¶2

[³²⁰⁸ ]

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶4

FRIDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

¶7

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1662 OF 2008

¶8

Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the Order and decree in O.P No.1493 ot 2004, Daled 15-07-2005 on the file of the Court of the Chairman lvlotor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-ll Additional IVletropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-XVl Addl. Chief Judge, Hyderabad.

¶9

Between:

¶10

M.R.Chandra Shekar, S/o.Easwaraiah Government Servant R/o.H.No.3-1104/7, Shathavahana Nagar Colony, Road No.'1 , L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad.

¶11

Smt.Latha, W/o.M.R.Chandra Shekar Household Ryo. H. No.3-1-104/7, Shathavahana Nagar Colony, Road No.'1 , L-B.Nagar, Hyderabad.

¶12

...APPELLANTS

¶13

AND

¶14

The Manager, [VI/s.Road Carrier of lndia, 374, Chenoy Trade Centre, Secunderabad.

¶15

United lndia lnsurance Co Ltd, Rep by its Branch Office, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Secunderabad.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Counsel for the Appellants : SRI C VIKRAM CHANDRA

¶18

Counsel for the Respondents No.1 & 2 : SRI SOMANCHI VENKATESWARLU

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA

¶21

M.A.C.M.A. No.1662 OF 2OO8

¶22

JUDGMENT:

¶23

This appeal is preferred questioning the award and decree dated 15.07.2005 passed by the II Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-XVl Additional Chief Judge, Hyderabad, (in short 'tribunal'), in O.P. No.l493 of 2OO4 whereby the Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.1,55,000/- with proportionate costs payable by respondents 1 and 2^jointly and severally along with interest @ 9o/o per annum, as against the claim of the petitioners for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/-.

¶24

Heard both the counsel.

¶25

Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the Tribunal erred in considering Ex.A.6-Salary Certificate while assessing the compensation. The Tribunal has not awarded any amounts towards future prospects, loss of estate and funeral expenses to the claimants. Hence, it is prayed to enhance the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

¶26

¶27

4l Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-lnsurance Company has contended that the Tribunal has passed a well considered award and there are no grounds to interfere with the same

¶28

Perused the record.

¶29

As seen from the impugned award, while assessing the quantum of compensation, the Tribunal duly considering the age of the mother of the deceased has taken the multiplier '16' and taken the notional income of the deceased as Rs.15,OOO/per annum. As per the record, the deceased was aged 18 years and was studying Intermediate II year. Ex.A.6 Salary Certificate reveals that the deceased was working in a Transport Company and getting a salary of Rs.36O0/- per month. But, as the petitioner was a student, Ex.A.6-Sa1a4, Certificate cannot be relied upon as rightly held by the Tribunal. However, in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. as. Bhairo Prasadl, the Hon'blc Supreme Court has dealt with a similar case where the deceased was a major (aged 1B-19 years), a bachelor and u,as of an employable age but unemployed and an undergraduate not possessing a professional or technical degree. In such

¶30

I 20l8 SCC Online A1l 5755

( I

backdrop, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has determined the notional income of the deceased on the basis of the Minimum Wages Act. In vievv of the said ratio, this Court feels it^just and reasonable to consider the income of the deceased @) Rs.100/per day i.e. Rs.3,O00/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum. Out of the said amount 50% has to be deducted towards personal expenses and as per the age of the deceased, the multiplier applicable in the case on hand is '18'. That apart, the claimants are also entitled for future prospects @ 4Ool,. Further, the Tribunal has not granted any amounts towards transportation, funeral charges and other expenses, to which the claimants are entitled to. Even the Tribunal has not granted any amounts towards loss of Filial Consortium and loss of Estate to the claimants for the loss of their son. Thus, the amounts to which the claimants are entitled to carl be summed up as under:

¶35

Loss of Earnings 6,48,000,00 (Rs.360OO x l8) (-) 50% personal expenses 3,24,000-00 3,24,000-o0 (+) 407.r future prospects 1,29,600-00 (+) Loss of Filial Consortium @^{Rs.a0o00ito each parent} 80,000-00 (+) Transportation and 15,O00-00 Funeral charges (+) Loss of Estate 15,OO0-OO Rs. 5,63,600 00

¶36

¶37

¶38

7l Accordingly, the compensation arrlount of Rs. i,55,000/- granted by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.5,63,600/- payable by respondents I and 2 jointly and severally along with interest @ 7 .5%o per annum from the date of the appeal till realization on the enhanced compensation amount of Rs.4,0B,6OO/-. The entire compensation amount 'ashall be paid within a period of one month from the date of receipt ol a copy of this order. On such deposit, both the claimants are entitled to withdraw the compensation amount equally.

¶39

Accordingly, the Appea-1 is allowed.

¶40

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand

¶41

closed. No order as to costs.

¶42

iBtie?lil=*?ti:"Ht[

¶43

//rRUE coPY/' .=S;8*^oFFlcER

¶44

to'., t" c!?l,rxl^-U""t3, r,iEBX",?l *91''ffi0, t3[lil':iH[;:' -iii,l:8:Sl MetroPolitan^Sessl(

¶45

¶46

a$['sslsgdls;,tr^ii"Y.llg'i'?m$i'xfi^{i8ifI#:]*ro""'} 4. Two^{CD CoPies.} BSK

t t

HIGH COURT

DATED:1610612023

5lArE I A
q ND ;llltT
fo \t \\t1
( !-1
t nra.' " -/'

¶52

JUDGMENT

¶53

MACMA.No.1662 of 2008

¶54

ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS.

I
I\3

[³²⁰⁸ ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶59

FRIDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶60

PRESENT

¶61

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

¶62

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1662 OF 2008

¶63

Between:

¶64

M.R.Chandra Shekar, S/o.Easwaraiah Government Servant R/o.H.No.3-1'10417, Shathavahana Nagar Colony, Road No.1, L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad.

¶65

Smt.Latha, W/o.lvl.R.Chandra Shekar Household Rl/o.H.No.3-1-'104/7, Shathavahana Nagar Colony, Road No.1, L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad.

¶66

...APPELLANTS

¶67

AND

¶68

1 The Manager, M/s.Road Carrier of lndia, 374, Chenoy Trade Centre, Secunderabad.

¶69

United lndia lnsurance Co Ltd, Rep by its Branch Office, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Secunderabad-

¶70

...RESPONDENTS

¶71

Appeal filed under Section 173 of tt/otor Vehicles Act against the Order and decree in O.P No.1493 of 2004, Dated 15-07-2005 on the file of the Court of the Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-ll Additional lvletropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-XVl Addl. Chief Judge, Hyderabad.

¶72

OROER : 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 case and upon hearing the arguments of Sri C Vikram Chandra, Advocate for the Appellant and Sri Somanchi Venkateswarlu, Advocate for the Respondbnts No.1 & 2.

¶73

This Court doth Order and Decree as follows :

¶74

That the M.A.C.M.A No.1662 of 2008 be and hereby is allowed:

¶75

thal the Compensation amount of Rs.1,55,000/- granted by the Tribunal be and hereby is enhanced to Rs.5,63,0001- payable by respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally along with interest @ 7.Sok per annum from the date of

¶76

the appeal till realization on the enhanced compensation amount of Rs.4,08,60001;

¶77

That the entire compensalion amount shall be^paid with a^period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order;

¶78

That the on such deposit, both. claimants be and hereby are entitled to withdraw the compensation amount equally;

¶79

That save as aforesaid, the decree of the Lower Court shall stands confirmed in all other respects;

¶80

That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal.

¶81

SD/.C.PRAVEEN KUMAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// (Y1 SECTION OFFICER

¶82

To, 1 The Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-ll Additional Metrooolitan Sessions Judge-cum-XVl Addl. Chief Judge, Hyderabad. ftiVitn^records;

¶83

2 Two CD Copies BSK

HIGH COURT

DATED:1610612023

DECREE

MACMA.No.1662 of 2008

¶90

ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS.

¶91

M.R.Chandra Shekar and Anr. v. M/S.Road Carrier of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.R.Chandra Shekar and Anr. v. M/S.Road Carrier of India and Anr.

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

Rathod Ganesh , Ganu Vs the State of A.P.

M/S. Pooja Corporation Vs M/S. Parameshwari Dall Mill and 2 Others

Mr.Mirza Saleem Baig Vs Smt.Sabira Begum

Kum Panden Bagya Vs K. Ganesh and Anr.

Suddala Parsharamulu Vs Nerella Kankaiah and 2 Ors.

The Project Dir, Dist Women and Child Devp Agency and Another Vs Bala Bhaskar Rao, Khammam and Another