Partly allowed

Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd., v. Y. Achamma and 5 Others

Telangana HC25 Jul 2023MACMA/2523/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common appeal clarified procedural maintainability against non-joinder claims and enhanced compensation from Rs.4.63 lakhs to Rs.8.77 lakhs based on the deceased's skilled labour earnings, future prospects, and loss of consortium, while dismissing the insurer's challenge.

What did the court decide?

MACMA No.4070 allowed, compensation enhanced to Rs.8,77,000 with interest; MACMA No.2523 dismissed. Respondents directed to deposit enhanced amount within two months.

Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd., Vs Y. Achamma and… — Money Laundering | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

¶5

MACMA NOS: 2523 AND^/t070 OF 2014

¶6

MACMA NO 2s23 0F 2014

¶7

Appeal Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the order and decree in M.V.O.P.No.853 of 2010 dated 23-1-14 on the file of the Court of the Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-lV Additional District Judge, R.R. District.

¶8

Between:

¶9

Shriram General lnsurance Company Ltd., Rep. by it's Divisional Manager, Kundaas Estate, Adjacent to Jaya lnternation Hotel, Reddy Hostel Road, Abids, Hyderabad. Policy No.100031311101157226 valid from O2.11.2OO9 to 01.11.2010

¶10

...APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NO.3

¶11

AND

¶12

Y. Achamma, Wlo. Guruvaiah, Occ: Housewife, Ri/o. H.No. Plot No. 55, Saijyothi Colony, R.C.Puram, R.R.Dist.

¶13

Y. Guruvaiah, S/o. Laxmaiah, Rl/o. H.No. Plot No. 55, Saijyothi Colony, R.C.Puram, R.R.Dist.

¶14

Y. Prabhakar, S/o. Guruvaiah, Rl/o. H.No. Plot No. 55, Saijyothi Colony, R.C.Puram, R.R.Dist.

¶15

Y. Jeevana, D/o. Guruvaiah, Occ: Student Rl/o. H.No. Plot No. 55, SaUyothi Colony, R.C.Puram, R.R.Dist. (R4 is being minor rep. by her natural Guardian and Next friend i.e. Respondent No. 1)

¶16

...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS

¶17

Md. Ayaz, S/o. Md. Osman, Occ: Owner, Rl/o.^H.No. 106, Victory Residency, Ranga Reddy District.

¶18

Md. Moizuddin, S/o. Not Known to the Appellant, Occ: Business^R:/o. H.No.83-22811'15, Rahamath Nagar, Erragadda, Hyderabad. (Owner of the Eicher DCM Van Bearing No.AP 28 W-0616)

¶19

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS NOS.1 &²

¶20

Counsel for the Appellant: MR. KONDADI AJAY KUMAR

¶21

Counsel for the Respondents: MR. KASI REDDY JAGATHPAL REDDY

¶22

MACMA NO 4070 0F 2014

¶23

Appeal Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the order and decree in M.V.O.P.No.853 of 2010 daled 23-1-2014 on the file of the Court of the Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-lV Additional District Judge, R.R. District at L.B. Nagar.

¶24

Between:

¶25

Y. Achamma, W/o. Gurvaiah, Aged 46 years, Occ: Household, F/o plot No.55, Saijyothi Colony, R.C. Puram, Ranga Reddy District.

¶26

Y. Guravaiah, S/o. Laxmaiah, aged 54 years, Occ: Nil, R/o plot No.sS, Saijyothi Colony, R.C. Puram, Ranga Reddy District.

¶27

Y. Prabhakar Rao, S/o. Guravaiah, Occ: Nil, Rl/o Plot No.55, Saijyothi Colony, R.C. Puram, Ranga Reddy District.

¶28

Y. Jeevana, D/o. Guravaiah, Occ: Student, Rl/o Plot No.SS, Saijyothi Colony, R.C. Puram, Ranga Reddy District. (Being mior rep by her natural guadian and next friend i.e Appellant No.1)

¶29

...APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS

¶30

AND

¶31

Md. Ayaz, S/o. Md. Osman, Aged Major, Occ: Business, R:/o H.No.106 Victory Residency, Ranga Rcddy District.

¶32

Md. Moizuddin, S/o. Not Known, Aged Major, Occ: Business, Resident of H.No.8-3-228l 1 1 5, Rahamathnagar, Enagadda, Hyderabad.

¶33

The Shriram General lnsurance Company Limited, rep by its Divisional Manager, Kundaas Estate, Adjacent to Jaya intemational Hotel, Reddy Hostel Road' Abids' Hvderabad'

¶34

...RES'.NDENTS/RES,.NDENTS

¶35

Counsel forthe Appellant: MR. KAS| REDDYJAGATHPAL REDDY

¶36

Counsel for the Respondents Nos.1 & 2: NONE APPEARED

¶37

Counsel for the Respondent No.3: MR. K. AJAY KUMAR

¶38

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶39

THE HON'BLE SRI .TUSTICE Nrlh{AVAItApU RAJDSHWAR RAO

¶40

M.A.C.M.A.Nos.2SZ3_q f 2A l4 and.4O7O of 2Ol4

¶41

coMMON JUDGMENT:

¶42

These !:rvo appea.ls arc being disposed of bv this cornmon jlrdgment since IVI.A.O.M.A.No.2523 of 2Ol4 filed bv the Insurance Company and M.r.C.N{.A.No.4070 ,rt ZOt+ fiied by the petitiorrers/claimants are directecl against the ver.v same order and decree dated 23.01.2014 passed in O.P.No.BS3 of 2010 on the file ol the Motor Accidents Cl.rims Tribunal-<:um-lv Additiona-l District Judge, Ranga l?cdd1, [i5111ct (for short,the Tribunat).

¶43

For the sai<c of conveniencc. the parties hereina-fter rviil bc referrecl to as they are arrayed beiore [he 'lribu n a l.

¶44

Brief facts of the case a.re that on 01.07.2010 at about 5.00 p.rn. near DRK Coilege X roads, Bachupall5,, Quthbr-illapur, Ilangd Reddy District, one y.Rajesh (deceased) was proceeding on pulsar Motor Cycle bearing No.AP-23-Q-696 L {iom Gandimaisarnina X roacls torvards Ilachupaliy side slorvry on tire extreme reft side of the roacl and ivl-ren he reachecl near- DIRI( College X roa.ds,

¶45

.r I

¶46

¶47

RRN,J M.A.C.tr^.A. No.25Z3 14& 4O7O 14

¶48

¶49

Eachupally, at that tirne, one tricher DCM Van bearing No.AP-28-W-06 16, r.vhich was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner proceeding from Bachupally side in the opposite direction carne in the wrcng side and while overtaking another vehicle, dashed thc motorcycle of the deceased, as a result of rvhich, rhe deceased fell down from the motorcycle and sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot. The accident occurred due to the rash and negliger-rt driving of the driver of the Eicher DClvi Van. The poiice Dundigal of Cyberabad registered a case in Cr.No.281 of 2O 1O for the offence punishable under Section 304-A IpC against the driver of the offending vehicle. The deceased was ha,le and healthy and earning P.s.10,000/- per month by doing mastrJ work. Thelefore, the petitioners, who are the parents, brother and sister of the deceased, filed the claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-.

¶50

4 Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 remained ex-parte. The 3'a respondent filed a counter affidavit denying the averments made in the claim petition.

¶51

¶52

RRN,J M.A.C.M.^{A.No.2523-14 & 4070,14}

¶53

¶54

On behalf of the^{petitioners,P.Ws. Iand 2 were} examined and Exs.Al^{to A5 were marked.On behalf of the} respondents, none^{! /ere examined but markedEx.B- 1-Copy} of lnsurance Policy.

¶55

After considering the oral and^documentary evidence available on record,^{the Tribunal held that the} accident occurred due to the^{rash and negligent driving of} the driver of the ofl'ending^{vehicle and accordingly awarded} an amount of Rs.4,63,000/-^{with interest} @^{7.5o/o per} annum from the date^{of petitiontill the date of realization to} be paid by respondents^{jointly and severally. Challenging} the same, M.A.C.M.A.No.2523 of^{2074 isfiled by the} lnsurance Company and^{M.A.C.M'A.No'4070of 2014is} filed by the petitioners.

¶56

Learned counsel appearing for the^petitioners contended that though the deceased^wasearning Rs. 10,O00/- per month by doing mastry^{work as a skilled} labour, the Tribunal has fixed the income of^{the deceaseda.t} Rs.4,00O/- per rnonth. The Tribunal has not arvarded^just

¶57

Iiiil

¶58

4 RRN,J M.A.C.M.A.No.2521 14 & 1070 14

¶59

compensation under othci hcads and therefore, the amount awarded by the Triburnal is ve ry meager and unjustifiable.

¶60

On the other hand, learned Counsel for the 3.d respondent has contended that the acciclent occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the deceased. The claim petition is not maintainable for non-joinder of proper and necessar5r parties i.e., orvner and insurer of pulsar Motor Cycle bearing No.AP-23-Q-6961. Though there is no documentar5r evidence, the Tribunal erroneously fixed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.4,0OO/- per month. The amount awarded by the Tribunal is excessive.

¶61

A perusal of the impugned order discloses that the Tribuna-l having framed issue No.1 as to whether the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver and having considered the evidence of PW.2, an eye witness to the accident, coupled with the documentar5r evidence i.e., Ex.A-l-FIR and Ex.A-2charge-sheet, rightly carne to the conclusion that the accident occurred due to thc rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle and has answered in

¶62

¶63

)

¶64

RRN,J M. A.C.M.A.No.252I 14 A 4070 14

¶65

favour of the petitioners and against the respondents Therefore, there are no reasons to interfere with the linding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle

¶66

As regards the contention of the learned Counsel for the Insurance Company that the claim petition is not maintainable for non-joinder of proper and necessar5r parties, the Tribuna-l has categorically observed that though the 3.a respondent has taken a defence that the claim petition is not maintainable for non-joinder of proper and necessarl/ parties, the 3.d respondent has not examined any witness on the said aspect. 'lherefore, this Court is of the considered view that the Tribunal has rightly rejected the said contention of the 3',1 respondent.

¶67

1 1 . Insofar as ttre qua-ntum of compensation is concerned, the learned Counsel for the petitioners stated that the cieceased was doing mastry rvork and used to earn Rs.1O,OOO/- per month. He frlrther stated that mastry work is a skiiler-l work irnd in a catena of judgments in resDect of skilled labours, the Courts are fixing the just and

¶68

¶69

¶70

RRN,J M-4.C.M.A.No.2523 14 8. 4070 14

¶71

reasonable amount towards earnings. [n view of the above submission and since the rvork done by the deceased was a skilled work, this Court is inclined to fix the monthly income cf the deceased at Rs.5,000/- per month instead of Rs.4,OOO/- per month. Apart frorn the same, the petitioners are entitled to an addition of lOok towards future prospects on the income of the deceased, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Natio nal Insurance Compang

¶72

Limited Vs. Pranag Sethil as he r.r,as ageci below 4O years at the time of his demise. Therefore, the monthly income of the deceased comes to Rs.7,000/- (Rs.S,OOO/- + Rs.2,OOO/-). From this, 50% is to be deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased following Sarla Verma a. Delhi Transport Corporation2 as the deceased was a bachelor at the time of the accident. After deducting 50% amount towards his personal and living expenses, the contribution of the deceased to the family comes to Rs.3,500/- per month. As the age of the deceased was 22 years at the time of the accident, the appropriate multiplier

¶73

'^zotz ltoy scc oao.

¶74

' 2009 AcJ 1298 (SC)

¶75

¶76

RRN 'J M. A.c.M.A.No.252l_14 & 4070_14

¶77

applicable is^'l 8'. Adopting multiplier¹ 8, the total^{loss of} earnings comes to Rs.3,500/ - x 12 x 18 = Rs.7,56,000/-.

¶78

The Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.5,OOO/- towards transportation charges^and an^arnount of Rs.3,000/- to'vards damage of clothes and^{the same} needs no interference by this Court. Further,^{the Tribunal} has awarded an amount of Rs.20,000/-^{(Rs.5,000/-each)} towards loss of love and affection and loss of^{estate. The} same is to be revised and the petitioners are entitled^to compensation under othcr lreads. As^per Pranag Sethi (supra), the petitioners are entitied to Rs.33,0OO/- towards loss of estate and funeral expenses^(Rs. 15,000/-^{+ lOo/o +} 15,000⁺ 10%). Further, petitioners I and 2,^{whoare the} parents of the deceased, al'e entitled to a sum of Rs.4O,O00/- each under the head 'filial consortium'^{as per} the decision of the Apex Court in Magma General Insurqnce Compang Vs. Nanu Ram rrlias Chuht'rt Rqms. Thus, in all, the petitioners are entitled to a sum^of Rs.8,77,0O0/-^{(Rs.7,56,000 +} 33,000⁺ 80,000⁺ 5,000⁺ 3,000).

¶79

3 2013) l8 SCC r30

I i L.^-t

M.A.c.M.a.No.2523_14 & 4ol;tl'j

¶84

Though the claimed amount is Rs.S,O0,0OO/_ invoking the prir-rciple of just compensation, and in view of the law laid down by the Hon,ble Supreme Court in RaJesh as. Rajbir Singha, and in a catena of decisions, this Court is empowered to grant compensation beyond the craimed aInount.

¶85

The Tribunal has rightly awarded the rate of rnterest at 7.5 o/o p{Jr annum and the same needs no rnterference by this Court.

¶86

In the result, M.A.C.M.A.N o.4OZO of 2014 is allowed arrd the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.4,63,000/_ to Rs.g,7Z,OOO/(Rupees Eight Lakh Seventy Seven Thousand Only) with interest @z.s % p.a. from the date of petition tilr the date of realization. The respondents are directed to deposit the said amount with costs and interest, after giving due credit to the amount already deposited, if any, withir_r a period of two months frorn the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit, the petitioners are permitted o MeNulscloatotzo t3

¶87

¶88

¶89

RRN,J M.A.C.M.A. No.2521 14 & {07O 14

¶90

¶91

to withdraw the same without furnishing any security in the same manner and ratio as directed to be apportioned by the Tribunal. However, the petitioners are directed to deposit the deficit court fee on the enharrced amount within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this^judgment.

¶92

M.A.C.M.A.No.2523 of 2O14

¶93

In view of the above iindings in M.A.C.M.A.No.4070 of 20 14, which is decided in favour of the petitioners, this M.A.C.l\iI.A.I.{o.2523 of 2074 filed by tl-re Insurance Company is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.

¶94

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any are pending, shall stand closed

¶95

SD/. A.V.S. PRASAD ASSISTANT REGTSTRAR //TRUE COPY// s/

¶96

SECTION OFFICER

¶97

To,

¶98

1' The chairman, Motor vehicre Accident craims Tribunar-cum-rV Additionar ^^{DistrictJudge at R.R. DistricttWitnnecoiJsi - "'""}

¶99

One CC to Mr. KONDADIAJAV XUrUnn, nZrocate [OpUC].

¶100

one CC to Mr. KASI REDDY JAGAiipAi'Rl66V,,noro.rte [opUC]. 4. Two CD Copies.

{^r-

HIGH COURT

DATED: 2510712023

JUDGMENT

MACMA.No.2523 AND 4O7O of 2014

¶107

,trE STATE
1
:lq o
3 o 0tt ?$11
o A+
t
t
oE iF^1

¶108

DISMISSING THE MACMA NO 2523114 AND ALLOWING THE MACMA NO 4O7Ol14 WITHOUT COSTS

¶109

*
1-\rr

¶110

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶111

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶112

PRESENT

¶113

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

¶114

MACMA NOS: 2523 0F 2014

¶115

Between:

¶116

¶117

...APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NO.3

¶118

AND

¶119

Y. Achamma, Wo. Guruvaiah, Occ: Housewife, R/o. H.No. Plot No. 55, Saijyothi Colony, R.C.Puram, R.R.Dist.

¶120

Y. Guruvaiah, S/o. Laxmaiah, Fi/o. H.No. Plot No. 55, Saijyothi Colony, R.C.Puram, R.R.Dist.

¶121

Y. Prabhakar, S/o. Guruvaiah, Rlio. H.No. Plot No. 55, Saijyothi Colony, R.C.Puram, R.R.Dist.

¶122

Y. Jeevana, D/o. Guruvaiah, Occ: Student R/o. H.No. Plot No. 55, Saijyothi Colony, R.C.Puram, R,R.Dist. (R-4 is being minor rep. by her natural Guardian and Next friend i.e. Respondent No. 1)

¶123

...RESPONOENTS/PETITIONERS

¶124

Md. Ayaz, S/o. Md. Osman, Occ: Owner, R/o. H.No.106, Mctory Residency, Ranga Reddy District.

¶125

Md. Moizuddin, S/o. Not Known to the Appellant, Occ: Business^Rl/o. H.No.83-2281 1 1 5, Rahamath Nagar, Enagadda, Hyderabad. (Owner of the Eicher DCM Van Bearing No.AP 28 W-0616)

¶126

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS NOS.1 & 2

¶127

Appeal Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the order and decree in M.V.O.P.No.853 of 2010 daled 23-1-14 on the file of the Court of the Chairman Motor Accident Ciaims Tribunal-cum-lV Additional District Judge, R.R. District.

¶128

ORDER: This appeal coming on for hearing and upon^perusing the^grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of ttre Lower Court and the material^{papers in the} case and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. K. Ajay Kumar, Advocate^{for th€} Appellant and of Mr. Kasi Reddy Jagathpal Reddy, Advocate forthe Respondents.

¶129

This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

¶130

'l . That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and hereby Dismissed

¶131

That there be no order as to costs in this appeal

¶132

SD/. A.V.S. PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Chairman, Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-lV Additional District Judge at R.R. District (With Records)

¶137

Two CD Copies.

t\A{< {,

1,!

HIGH COURT

DATED:^2510712023

DECREE

MACMA.No.2523^{of 2014}

¶145

D]SM]SSING^{THE MACMAWITHOUTCOSTS}

¶146

't)
Yr..<br>)o N E

¶147

H]GH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD}

¶148

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY^{OF JULY} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^THREE

¶149

PRESENT

¶150

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^{NAMAVARAPURAJESHWARRAO}

¶151

MACMA NO: 4070 OF 2014

¶152

Between:

¶153

Y. Achamma, W/o. Gurvaiah, Aged^{46 years, Occ: Househoh,R/o Plot} No.55, Saijyothi Colony, R.C. Puram,^{Ranga Reddy District.}

¶154

Y. Guravaiah, S/o. Laxmaiah, aged^{54 years,Occ: Nil, R/o Plot No.55'} Saijyothi Colony, R.C. Puram, Ranga^{Reddy District.}

¶155

Y. Prabhakar Rao, S/o. Guravaiah,^{Occ:Nil,Ri/o Plot No.55, Saijyothi Colony,} R.C. Puram, Ranga Reddy District.

¶156

Y. Jeevana, D/o. Guravaiah, Occ: Student,^{Rl/o Plot No.55, SaijyothiColony,} R.C. Puram, Ranga Reddy District.^{(Being mior rep by her natural guardian} and next friend i-e Appellant^No.1 )

¶157

...APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS

¶158

AND

¶159

1 Md. Ayaz, S/o. lvld. Osman, Aged^{Major, Occ: Business, Ryo H'No.106 Victory} Residency, Ranga Rcddy District.

¶160

2 Md. lvloizuddin, Sio. Not Known,^{Aged Major,Occ: Business' Resident of} H.No.8-3-228l^{1 1} 5, Rahamathnagar,^{Erragadda,Hyderabad.}

¶161

3 The Shriram General lnsurance^{Company Limited, rep by its Divisional} Manager, Kundaas Estate, Adjacent^{to Jaya international Hotel, Reddy Hostel} Road, Abids, Hyderabad.

¶162

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶163

Appeal Under Section 173 of Motor^{Vehicles Act against the order anddecree} in M.V.O.P-No.853 of 2010 daled^{23-1-14 on the file of the Court of the Chairman} Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-lV^{AdditionalDistrictJudge, R.R. District.}

¶164

ORDER: This appeal coming on^{for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of} appeal, the Judgment and Decree of^{the Lower Court andthe material papersin the} case and upon l'rearing the arguments^{of Mr. Kasi ReddyJagathpalReddy,Advocate} for the Appellant and of Mr. K. Ajay^{Kumar, Advocate for the Respondent No.3 and} none appeared for the Respondents Nos.1^{& 2.}

¶165

This Court doth Order and Decree as^follows:

¶166

1 . That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous^{Appeal be andhereby is allowed}

¶167

That the compensation amount awarded by the tribunal be and hereby enhanced from Rs.4,63,0001 to Rs.8,77,0001 (Rupees Eight Lakhs Seventy Seven Thousand Only) with interest @7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.

¶168

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 a period of a copy this^judgment.

¶169

On such deposit, the petitioners be and hereby permifted to withdraw the same without furnishing any security in the same manner and ratio as directed to be apportioned by the tribunal

¶170

However that the petitioners be and hereby directed to deposit the deficit court fee on the enhanced amount within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this^judgment.

¶171