Allowed

Gogula Saidamma v. Syed Ahmed Ali

Telangana HC14 Jul 2023MACMA/2957/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, enhancing the accident compensation from Rs. 2,13,500 to Rs. 10,36,400 for the death of the deceased. The court considered income lost, future prospects, and awarded parental and filial consortium.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs. 10,36,400 with 7.5% interest from the date of the petition. Decree confirmed in other respects.

Gogula Saidamma Vs Syed Ahmed Ali — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³²⁰⁸ ]

¶2

j PRESENT t I I THE HON'BLE SMT.^{JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA} i 1 M.AC .M .M^{.A.No: 2957 of 20092957 of 2009of 20092009}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶4

FRIDAY, THE FOURTEENTH^{DAYOF JULY} TWO THOUSAND^{ANDTWENTY THREE}

¶5

M.AC .M .M^{.A.No: 2957 of 20092957 of 2009of 20092009}

¶6

Appeal filed under^{section173 of Motor VehiclesAct against the order and} decree in oP^{No.2460f 2005 dated 30-08-20060n the file of the court of the} Motor Abcidents^{Claims Tribunal-Cum-District Judge, Nalgonda'}

¶7

Between:

¶8

Gogula Saidamma,^{Wo.late Chandraiah,aged 32 years, Occ:Housewife}

¶9

G.Yadamma,^{D/o.late Chandraiah, aged 12 years, Occ:Student}

¶10

G.Kalpana,^{D/o.late Chandraiah, aged 9 years, Occ:Student}

¶11

G.Venkulu, S/o.Mattapally,^{aged 67 years' Occ: Nil}

¶12

5.^.Gogula Earamma,^{Wo.Venkulu,aged 61 years' Occ: Hosuehold}

¶13

All are^{Ryo.GaddikondaramVillage, Thipparthy Mandal, Nalgonda District'}

¶14

[Appellants^{No.2 & 3 being minorsrep by their guardianand motherthe} appellant No.1^herein)

AND

...ApPellants/claimants

¶19

1 &ed Ahmed Ali. S/o.Silar Saheeb,^{Aged Maior, Occ:Owner of JCB Proclain} idnS,n"^{No.'t 43736t Fl/o.Vadlamudi village, Chadurolu Mandal, Guntur} District.

¶20

The IFFCO-TOKIO^{General lnsurance Co. Ltd., O/o.Registered Office 34'} Nehru Place, New^{Delhi - 110 019.}

¶21

...ResPondents/ResPondents

¶22

Counsel for the^{Appellants:SRtCHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY GOPIREDOY}

¶23

Counsel for the^{Respondent No'2:SRI A RAitlA KRISHNA REDDY}

¶24

Counsel for the^{RespondentNo.1 : None Appeared}

¶25

The Court detivered^{the following:JUDGMENT}

¶26

¶27

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

¶28

M.A.C.M.A.No.2957 of 2OO9

¶29

JUDGMENT:

¶30

This appeal is filed against the Order dated 30.O8.2006 in O.P.No.246 of 2005, passed by the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Principal Dist.rict .Iudgc, Nalgonda

¶31

O.P,No.246 ol 2005 u,as hled by appellants/ petitioners claiming compcnsation ol Rs.4,00,00O / - for the death of the deccasecl Clhandraiah. who dicd in the motor vehicle accident occurred on O 1.01 .2O05. The trial Cour[ after considering the arguments of both sides, granted compensation only to an extent of Rs.2, i3,5OO/-. Aggrieved by the saicl Order, they preferred the presen t appeal.

¶32

As the pres<:nt appeal is prct-crrcd only for enhancement of the compcnsation amount granted by the trial Court, this Court is not going into other details.

¶33

The lcarncd Counsel for thc appellanrs statcd that the age of the deceascd u,as 3ll vears ancl l.rc rvas doing labour u,ork of

¶34

¶35

digging agricultural wells and earning Rs.4,000/_ per month and thus this Court finds that it is just and reasonable to take the salary of the deceased as Rs.4,O00/_ per month. As such his annual income would be Rs.4g,OOO/_.

¶36

As per the guidelines of the Hon,ble Apex Court in dictum of Scrlcr Vermd Vs. Dethi Transport Corporation,r if the deceased was married, I /4tb of his income has to be deducted as there are 5 dependents i.e., |2,OOO I - towards his personal expenses. Thus, the annual income of the deceased after deducting personal expenscs would come to Rs_36,000/- per annum (Rs.48,0O0 - Rs.12,000= Rs.36,000/-) and rhe Hon,ble Apex Court in the dictum of National Insurance Compang Limited Vs. Pranag SethP, held that the future prospects of income of the self employed shall also be included in determination of the compensation. Thus, considering the age of the deceased i.e., 35 years, 4OVo of the income i.e., Rs. 14,4OO/- has to be added towards future prospects and thus the amount would become Rs.5O,400/- (Rs.36,0O0 + Rs.14,4O0 = Rs.50,40O). This sum if multiplied with the multiplier 16, as applicable to the age of the deceased i.e., 35 years, it would

¶37

'^{(zooq) c scc rzr}

¶38

'1zotz1^{ro scc oso}

¶39

¶40

come ro Rs.8,06,400/- (Rs.50,40O Xl6 = Rs.8,06,400/-). Thus, appellants7 pctitioncrs arc entitled to Rs.8,06,4O0/- under the head^'Loss of Dcper rdcrrcy'.

¶41

Besides, appellants are also entitled for compensation under 'conventional iteads' irs prcscribed in the dictum of National Insurance Cotnpang Limited. Vs. Pranag Sethi, i.e.. Rs.15,000/ tor"r,ards loss of Ostate and Rs.15,000/- towards funeral charges and Rs.40,000/, to appellant No.1 towards spousal consortium. Therefore, they are entitled to Rs.70,0OO/under the 'Conve ntional heads'.

¶42

FurLhcr, rfre I lon'blc Supremc Court, by reiterating the comprehensive interpretaLion of 'consortium' given in the authorify of Magna General Insurq.nce Compang Llmlted us. Na,nu Ram Alias Chuhttt Rq.m & other*, and in the authority between United India Insurance Compang Limited us. Satinder Kaur (a) Satuinder Kaur and other{, fortified that the amounts for loss of consortium shall be aq,arded to the children u'ho losc thc carc and protcction of their parents as 'parental consor[ium'and to the parcnts as,^,filial consortium, for the loss ol their grown-up children, to compensate their

¶43

' 1zors1^{rs scc' r:o}

¶44

'^(zozo) s sc(' o.r

¶45

¶46

agony, lovc and affection, care and companionship of deccased children. Accordingly, it is just and reasonable to award Rs.4O,000/- each to appellants No.2 & 3 towards^,parental consortium' and Rs.40,000/ - each to appellants No.4 & 5 towards'filial consortium'.

¶47

Therefore, appellants/ petitioners are entitled for the compensation in the following terms

¶48

Loss ofdependency I	Rs.8,06,40Ol-
Conventionalheads 2	Rs.70,000/-
Parental Consortium @^{Rs.40,000/-each} .)	Rs.80,00O/-
FilialConsortium @^{Rs.40 000} each 4	Rs.80,000/-
TOTAL	Rs.1O,36,4OOl-

¶49

In the result, the appeal is allowed by enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.2,13,50O/- to Rs.10,36,400/(Rupees Ten lakhs Thirty six thousand Four hundred rupees only) with interest at the rate of 7.5o/o per annum from the dale of filing the petition till the date of realization. Though, Respondents No.l and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation, rcspondent No.2/Insurance Company is directed to deposit thc entire amount within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this

¶50

I I I

¶51

¶52

Judgment. Ou1 of total compensal ion ;lmount appellants No.2 and 5 are entitlecj to Rs.SO,OOO/_ eactr and appellant No.1 is entitled to remaining amounr. On such deposit, all appellants arc permittcd to u.ithdrar,r, the sard amount along with in tcrcst accrued on it . Appcllants are also directed to pa). the cteficit Court fee on the enhanced amount. There shall b< no ordcr as to costs.

¶53

Miscellancous petitions pcndir_rg, if any, shall stancl

¶54

closed.

¶55

Sd/. T. JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Chairman,^{MotorAccidentsClaimsTribunal-Cum-DistrictJudge'} Nalgonda.^(with records,^{if anY)}

¶60

One CC to SRI CHANDRA^{SEKHAR REDDYGOPIREDDY' Advocate} loPUCl

¶61

bne CC to SRI^{A. RAMA KRISHNAREDDY' Advocate[OPUC]}

¶62

Two CD Copies

ASR-2&hm

i ] d t { II jI

HIGH COURT DATED:1410712023

¶68

itI 1 t 1 I

¶69

JUDGMENT

¶70

3 IATE OA
lND C)>
-L*
1\ $tt
ir
)uoo c'.
+ oEsf' d

¶71

MACMA.No.2957 of 2009

¶72

.vIi
jt
'
I
j

¶73

ALLOWING MACMA WITHOUT COSTS

G^q*pld Y,U

:
i
i

[³²⁰⁸ ]

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶79

l1 FRIDAY, THE FOURTEENTH^DAY OF^JULY i TWO THOUSAND^AND TWENTY^THREE I

¶80

PRESENT

¶81

¶82

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE P.^{SREE SUDHA}

¶83

M .AC.M.A.No: 2957 of²⁰⁰⁹

¶84

Between:

¶85

1 Gogula Saidamma, Wo.late^{Chandraiah, aged 32 years, Occ:Housewife}

¶86

2 G.Yadamma, D/o.late Chandraiah,^{aged12 yearc, Occ:Student}

¶87

3 G.Kalpana, D/o.late Chandraiah,^{aged 9 years, Occ:Student}

¶88

4 G.Venkulu, S/o.Mattapally,^{aged 67 years, Occ: Nil}

¶89

5 dogula Earamma, W/o.Venkulu,^{aged 61 years, Occ: Hosuehold} II

¶90

Al are R/o.Gaddikondaram^{Village, Thipparthy Mandal, Nalgonda Diskict'}

¶91

lAppellants^{No.2 & 3 being minorsrep by their guardianand motherthe} appellant No.1 herein)

¶92

rt jl

¶93

...Appellants/Claimants

¶94

AND i

¶95

¶96

1. Sved Ahmed Ali, S/o.Silar^{Saheeb, Aged} Major, Occ:Owner^of JCB^Proclain lEngine^{No.143736] R/o.Vadlamudi villag} e, Chadurolu Mandal,^Guntur District.

¶97

The IFFCO-TOKIO General^{lnsurance Co. Ltd., O/o.Registered Office 34,} Nehru Place, New Delhi^{- 1 10 01 9.}

¶98

¶99

..Respondents/ResPondents

¶100

Appeal filed under Section^{173 of Motor VehiclesAct against the order_and} decree in oP No.246 0f^{2005 dated 30-08-20060n the file of the court of the} Motor Accidents Claims^{Tribunal-Cum-District Judge, Nalgonda'}

¶101

ORDERl$his.appeal c coming^{on for hearingand uponperusingthegrounds_of} appeal,lihe Judgment^{and Decreeof the Lower Court andthe material paperin the} ciie inO upo; hearing^{the arguments of SRI CHANDRA SEKHARREDDY} cOptREDDy, Advocate^{ior the Appellants andof SRI A. RAMA KRISHNAREDDY,} Advocate for Respondent^{No'2 and NoneAppeared for Respondent No l ef$'su$^ Ptr{o</sup> or^b't AAiPc"t.^'}

¶102

I This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

¶103

That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and hereby is allowed by enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.2,13,500 to Rs.10,36,4001 (Rupees Ten Lakhs Thirty Six Thousand Four Hundred Rupees only) with interest at lhe 7.5%o per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of realization;

¶104

That though the Respondents No.1 & 2 be and hereby are joinfly 5d severally liable to pay compensation, respondent No.2/lnsurance Company is directed td deposit the entire amount within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment;

¶105

T'hat out of total compensation amounts appellants No.2 & S be and hereby are entitled to Rs.50,0001 each and appellant No.1 is entifled to remaining amount;

¶106

¶107