Partly allowed

A.Lachamma , Lachavva and 2 Ors. v. N.Venkat Reddy and 2 Ors.

Telangana HC9 Aug 2023MACMA/2513/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court enhanced the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in a fatal accident case. The court re-evaluated the deceased's monthly income, applied a multiplier, and granted additional damages for loss of estate, funeral expenses, and loss of filial consortium, increasing the total award significantly.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced from Rs. 1,48,000/- to Rs. 10,55,800/- with interest at 7.5% p.a.; respondents directed to deposit the amount.

A.Lachamma , Lachavva and 2 Ors. Vs N.Venkat Reddy… — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³³⁰⁴ I

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

¶6

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 2513 OF 2011

¶7

Appeal filed Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the Order and decree in O.P.No.888 of 2006 dated 08/05/2009 on the file of the Court of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- 1sr Additional District Judge, Nalgonda.

¶8

Between

¶9

'1. A.Lachamma, @ Lachawa, Wo.late Anjaiah Rl/o.Gopagami Venkatapuram Village, Pedda Shankarampet Mandal, Medak District.

¶10

A.Pentaiah, S/o.late Kistaiah R/o.Gopagami Venkatapuram Village, Pedda Shankarampet Mandal, Medak Diskict.

¶11

A.Parvatamma, Wo.A.Pentaiah R/o.Gopagami Venkatapuram Village, Pedda Shankarampet Mandal, Medak District.

¶12

...Petitioner/Appellant

¶13

AND

¶14

N.Venkat Reddy, S/o.Mallareddy, Owner of Lorry No.AP 13 f 924 R/o.H.No.104-496, Narsapur Street, Siddipet.

¶15

Md.Hussain, S/o.Md.Mahboob, R/o.H.No.12-3-11OlCl1, Qader Pura, Siddipet, Medak Diskict.

¶16

The United lndia lnsurance Co Ltd, rep by its Divisional Manager Olo.1-72411'lO,3'd Floor, PB No.651, Ramalaya Building, SD Road, Secunderabad. (Respondent Nos.l and 2 not necessary in this case)

¶17

...Respondents/Respondents

¶18

Counsel for the Appellant(s): Sri. B PARAMESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: Sri NARSI REDDY TEEGALA The Court made the following: JUDGMENT

¶19

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHTVAR RAO

¶20

M.A.C.M.A.No.25I3 OF 20l 1

¶21

JUDGMENT:

¶22

Aggricved bv the orcier and declee dated

¶23

08.O5.2009 passcd in O.P.No.88B ot 2005 bv the^()hairman. Motor Accidents Claims Tr-ibr-rnal cunr.I Adclit ional District Judge, Nalgonda (for short "the Tribunal"), the appellantspetitioners preferred the present appeal seeking enhancemen t of compensation

¶24

2 For convenience, ihe parties hereinafter will be referred to as thev are arraved belore the Tribuna]

¶25

J Briefl facts o[ the case are that on 28 .04.2006,

¶26

the deceased Sailu ald one Prabhakar \vere travelling on a Hero Honda Spiendor motorcycle bearing No.AP-29-J-32 1 1 from Hyderabad to Madikonda of Warangal District and the deceased was riding the motorcycle. When they reached near Bibinagar village, one lorry bearing No.AP-13-T-924, u,hich was Criven b,r' its dnver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the motorc-vcle, as a result ol i,vl-rich, the deceased died at the spot and thc pillion ridcr sustained grievous injuries. Therefcre, the,petitioners filed the O.p.

¶27

I I

¶28

RRN,J M.A. C.M.A. No.251l of 2011

¶29

¶30

against the respondents seeking compensation of Rs.3,o0,000/-.

¶31

4 The 2nd respondent remained ex-parte. Respondent Nos. 1 and 3 filed counters separately opposing the claim.

¶32

After considering the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 1,48,000/- with interest @ 7 .5o/o per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization to be paid by respondent Nos.l to 3 jointly and severally. Challenging the said award, the petitioners have filed the present appeai seeking enhancement.

¶33

In the present appeal, the petitioners have filed l.A.No. I of 2021 seeking enhancement of compensation from Rs.3,0O,OOOl- to Rs.20,00,000/- and the same was ordered on O2.O8.2O23 subject to payment of court fee for the enhanced claim amount.

¶34

7 Heard both sides. Perused the record.

¶35

RRN, J M. A. C . .1. A. 11o. 2 51 I of 2011

¶36

Learned counsel appearing lor the petitioners contended that the Tribunal should have llxecl the deceased's income :rt Rs.6,000/ - pe r monrit rnstead of fixing the annual income at Rs.l5,000/ . The TriL,unal has yet to a,'ard just compensation under other ht:ads and therefore, the amount ar.l.arded b1. the Tribunat is very meager and unjustifiable.

¶37

9 . Learned counsel appearing for the p(.titioners further submits that the deceased was doing milk t-rusiness. He was also selected to the post of police Constable and to prove the same, the petitioner has filed Ex.A-7 Letter frcm the Police Recruitment Board. Had the accident not occurred, the peiitioner would have become zL police Constable.

¶38

On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.3 l-ras contended that the deceased has passed onl1, a phvsical test and has to pass tt^,,1 other examinations for recruirment to the post of Constabte. The deceased was not hnally selected for the post of Constable. There is no proof regarding the income of the deceased and

¶39

-- X

¶40

¶41

RRN. J M.A.C.M. A. No.2513 of 20't1

¶42

based on the assumption of the milk business. the Tribunal fixed the deceased's income at Rs. 15,000 I - per arlnum. The deceased was a bachelor and the Tribunai ought to have deducted 5Ool, toivards the personal expenses of the deceased instead of 1 /3,,1.

¶43

11 The Iinding of the Tribunal with regard to the manner in which the accident took place has become final, as the respondents do not challenge the same.

¶44

Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the petitioners stated that the deceased was doing milk business anC earning Rs.6,000/_ per month arld he has also passed the physical test for the post of police Constable. To prove the same, the petitioners examined PW.5, who deposed that he used to purchase milk from the deceased @ Rs.16 / - per litre. In the instant case, there is no proper evidence to show the deceased,s income at the time of the accident. But, taking into consideration the aspect that the deceased was doing milk business and he has passed the physical test for the post of police Constable and had the deceased been selected for the post of

¶45

)

¶46

RRN,J M.A.C.l,t.A.N()-251 I of 201 1

¶47

Constable, his salan, lr,ould be more thart rvhat he has claimed and therefore, vra media, this Court rs irrclined to fix the monthly income of the deceased at Rs 6,5O0/_ per month. Apart from the same, the petitioners are entitled to an addition of 4Oo/o tow,ards future prospects, as per the decision of the Hon,ble Supreme Court in National Insurance compang Limited as. pranag sethi and, otherst. Therefore, the monthl-y income of the d,:ceased comes ro Rs.9. i 00/- (Rs.6,S0O/ I Rs.2,600/). From this, 50% is to be deducted towards the personal expensesi of the deceased following Scrlc Vertna u. Delhi Transport Corporation2 as the deceased was a bachelor at the t.ime of the accident. After deducting 50% towards his personal and living expenses, the deceased,s contribution to the t-am ily comes to Rs.4.550/- per month. As the deceased,s age was 23 years at the time of the accident, the appropriate muitiplier applicable is ,1g,. Adopting multiplier 18, the total loss of dependency comes to Rs.9,82,g00/ (Rs.a,550/- x 12 x 1B). The petitioners are ftirther entitled to Rs.33,OO0/- (Rs tS,OOO/- + tOo/o and Rs. 15,OOO/. + lOo/n)

¶48

'.2ol.i AC.l 2 /-OO

1009 A( J l]98 (s(.)

: I

RRN,J M.A.C.M.A.No.2513 0f 201 1

¶53

towards ioss of estate and funeral expenses, as per Pranay Sethi's case (supra). Further, considering the fact that the lst petitioner is the mother ol the deceased, this Court is inclined to award a sum of Rs.40,000/- under the head of loss of filial consortium as per the decision of the Apex Court in Magma General Insurance Compang Limited a. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ro,m and otherss. Thus, in all, the petitioners are entitled to a sum of Rs. 10,55,800/-.

¶54

The Tribunal has rightly awarded the rate of interest at 7 .5o/o per annum and the same needs no interference by this Court

¶55

In the result, the M.A.C.M.A is allowed in part and the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.i,48,000/- to 10,55,800/- (Rupees Ten lakhs fifty five thousand eight hundred only) with interest @^{7.5 o/o p.a. from the} date of petition till the date of realization. The respondenrs are directed to deposit the said amount with costs and intercsL after giving due credit to the amount already deposited, if any, rvithin trvo months from receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioners are r lzota; ra scc r:o

¶56

¶57

RRN.J M.A.C.M. .r o.2511 of 2011

¶58

permitted to \'ithdraw their respective sharc amount as per the apportionment made by the Tribunal. There srall be no order as Lo co sts.

¶59

As a sequel, miscellar-reous petitions, if anv pending, shall stand closed.

¶60

Sd/-MOHD SANAULLAH ANSARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶61

/ffRUE COPY//

¶62

\1.

¶63

SECTION OFFICER

¶64

To,

¶65

1 . The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-^{1sr Additional District Judge,} Nalgonda.

¶66

One CC to SRl. B PARAMESEWARA RAO^Advocale IOPUC] 3. One CC to SRl. NARSI REDDY TEEGALA^Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies SP

t\2(

HIGH COURT

DATED:0910812023

JUDGMENT

MACMA.N o.2513 ot 2011

¶72

,1 $E STAr €
(
c
1 3 0tt 2[23 az
3'
*
O,i.S pA:tC

¶73

PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA

¶74

l)t
i."'t-'<br>

¶75

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶76

WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW THREE

¶77

PRESENT

¶78

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

¶79

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLAN EOUS APPEAL NO: 2513 oF 2011

¶80

Between:

¶81

A.Lachamma, @ Lachawa, Wo.late Anjaiah R/o.Gopagami Venkatapuram Village, Pedda Shankarampet Mandal, Medak District.

¶82

A.Pentaiah, S/o.late Kistaiah R/o.Gopagami Venkatapuram Village, pedda Shankarampet Mandal, Medak District.

¶83

A. Parvatamma, Wo.A.Pentaiah Rl/o.Gopagami Venkatapuram Village, pedda Shankarampet Mandal, Medak District.

¶84

...Petitioner/Appellant

¶85

AND

¶86

1 N,Vgnkat Reddy, S/o.Mallareddy, Owner of Lorry No.Ap 13 T g24 R/o.H.No.10-4-496, Narsapur Street, Siddipet.

¶87

2 Md.Hussain, S/o.Md.Mahboob, R/o.H.No..t2-3-11OlCt1, eader pura, Siddipet, Medak District.

¶88

The United lndia lnsurance co Ltd, rep by its Divisionar Manager oto.1-7241t10,3t'c Floor, PB No.651, Ramalaya'Buiiding, SD Road, Secunderabad. (Respondent Nos.l and 2 not necessary in this case)

¶89

.Respondents/Respondents

¶90

Appeal filed Under S decree iir o^p No s8s o,dS3*!"&#3rr[yr3?L%"J1f;5i,,3""',?flS'B'"','X'",?:"^i:l]i Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- 1sr Additional District Judge, Nalgondi.^{- - -' --} oRDER: This appear 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 SRr. B. PARAMESWAR RAo, Advocate for the Appellants and of sRl. T. NARSI REDDY, Advocate for the Respondents

¶91

This Court doth Order and Decree as follows :

¶92

That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and hereby is parfly Allowed.

¶93

That the amount of compensation from Rs.1,48,OOO/- to Rs.10,55,900/(Rupess Ten Lakhs Fifty Five Thousand Eight Hundred Only) be and hereby is enhanced; with interest @ 7.so/o p.A. from the date of petition till the date of realization.

¶94

That the respondents are directed to deposit the said amount with costs and interest after giving due credit to the amount already deposited, if any, within two monlhs from receipt of a copy of this Judgment;

¶95