Allowed

Vankidi Sujatha and Another v. a. Samaiah and 3 Others

Telangana HC5 Sept 2023MACMA/3029/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award, enhancing compensation from Rs. 3.60 lakh to Rs. 7.66 lakh for a deceased carpenter, adjusting income estimates and increasing sums for loss of estate, funeral, and consortium.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced from Rs. 3,60,000/- to Rs. 7,66,400/- with interest at 7.5% p.a. payable by respondents.

Vankidi Sujatha and Another Vs a. Samaiah and 3 Others — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³²¹⁶ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

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

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.LAXMAN

¶6

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MIS CELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 3029 OF²⁰⁰⁷

¶7

Appeal filed Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against^{the Order and} decree in M.V.O.P.No.636 of 2003 dated.05-09-2005 on the^file of the^{Courtof the} Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- I Additional^{District Judge,} Warangal.

¶8

Between:

¶9

Vankidi Sujatha, Wo Late Satyanarayana House hold R/o Ookal [H]^Village' Geesugonda Mandal, Warangal Dist.

¶10

Vankidi Divya, D/o Late Satyanarayana minor, rep. by^{petitionerno.1 R/o} Ookal [H] Village, Geesugonda Mandal, Warangal Dist.

¶11

R -1 dismissed for default vide Court order dated 1210712016

¶12

...APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS

¶13

AND

¶14

A. Samaiah Sio Sailu, age major Owner of Lorry and Business R/o^Begumpet, Kamanpoor Mandal, Karimnagar Dist.

¶15

United lndia lnsurance Company Limited, Rep. by its Branch^Manager, Branch Manager, Br. office, H.No. 13-36-6/4, 1st floor, NTPC, Jyothinagar' Karimnagar

¶16

United lndia lnsurance Company Limited, Rep. by^{its Divisional Manager,} Divisional Manager United lndia'lnsurance Company Limited,^{Divil. office,} M.G.Road, Pochamma Maidan, Warangal

¶17

Vankidi Shakunthala, Wo Dharmaiah Chjary House hold^{R/o Ookal} [H] Village, Geesugonda Mandal, Warangal Dist.

¶18

4th Respondent is not a necessary^party to this appeal

¶19

...RESPONDENTS

¶20

Counsel for the Appellant : M/S. JAYANTI S C SEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SRl. V KRISHNA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : None appeared

¶21

The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

¶22

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. LAXMAN

¶23

MOTOR ACCIDENT CTVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.3O29 OF 2OO7 JUDGMENT:

¶24

The present Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the appellants-claimants challenging the Award and Decree, dhted 05.09.2005 in M.V.O.P. No.636 of 2003 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (l Additional District Judge) Warangal, (hereinafter referred to as^.Tribunal,).

¶25

This Court by order dated 12.07.2016 dismissed the appeal against respondent No.l. This Court is inclined to suo motto recall the order of dismissal since respondent No.1 is set ex-parte before the Tribunal. Dismissal order is recalled. Notice to respondent No.1 is dispensed with.

¶26

The grievance of the claimants is that the Tribunal has not properly fixed the compensation and granted meager amounts under various heads and they are entitled for just and reasonable compensation.

¶27

Heard both sides.

¶28

The evidence on record shows that the deceased was Carpenter by profession. The claimants have produced salary certificate issued by- \Sri Raja Rajeshwara Enterprises,

¶29

¶30

¶31

Hanmakonda and the^{income is shownas Rs 4,0OO/-'Such} salary certificate^{was discarded by the Tribunalas the employer} was not examined. Such^{findings cannot be found fault'}

¶32

The Tribunal has fixed^{the income of the deceased as} Rs.2,500/-. The Inquest^{Reportand charge sheet shows that the} deceases belongs to^{Carpenter community and his profession was} Carpenter and the^{sarne was accepted by the Tribunal treating} him as skilled worker.^{The incomeof the deceasedfixed by the} Tribunal is very meager.^{Consideringthe year of accident, this} Court is inclined to fix Rs.3,500/-^{as incomeof the deceased'}

¶33

The deceased was aged about^{3O years old and he was self} employed; therefore,^{4O% shall be addedtowards futureincrease} in the income. Monthly^{income of the deceased comes to} Rs.4,9OO/-. The annual^{income of the deceasedcomes to} Rs.58,800/-. The appropriate^{multiplier for the person in the age} group betwe en 26 to 30^{years is '17'. The loss of incomeof the} deceased comes to Rs.9,99,60O/-.^{The deceased was survived by} three (03) dependents.^Therefore,1 /^{3'a of the income of the} deceased shalt be deducted^{towards personal expenses'1/3raof} income comes to Rs.6,66,400/-^{(Rs.9,99,600 x l/3} -^9,99,600)' The total loss of income^{of the deceased comes to Rs.6,66,400/-'}

\ I

) \

The Tribunal has granted Rs.10,OO0/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.1O,O00/- towards loss of estate. This Court is inclined to enhance to Rs. 15, OOO/ - tou.tards loss o/ estate. Rs.15,OO0/- towards loss o/ funeral expenses. This Court is inclined to grant a sum of Rs.4O,OOO/- each touards of toss of filial^{consortium and parental consortium,} which^includes Rs. 1O,OO0/ - granted towards consortium.

¶38

In the result, the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed by enhancing compensation from Rs.3,6O,0OO/- to Rs.7,66,4OOl-. The compensation amount shall carry interest at 7.5 %o per annum from the date of hling of the O.p. till the date of realization. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable to deposit the enhanced amount to the credit of O,p. along with accrued interest within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount in the proportions, as fixed by the Tribunal. The enhanced amount shall be paid to the appellant on payment of deficit Court fee on the enhanced compensation. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶39

//TRUE COPY//

¶40

SD/. P PADMANABHA REDDY, ASSrsrANr t{irsrRAR $/

¶41

SECTION OFFICER

¶42

To,

¶43

1 . The Chairman fVlotor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- I Additional District Judge, Warangal. (With records, if any)

li l,

2 une uU to^{SRl. JAYANTIS C SEKHAR' Advocate [OPUC]} 5.# & i;^{siil. t kntsHunRAo' Advocate [oPUC]}

¶50

1. Two CD^CoPies

ADK$>

t},.'-

HIGH COURT

DATED:0510912023

JUDGMENT

MACMA.No.3029 o12007

I yfe ST{r€
q
o Ci
0 B ttts 207[
L)
*
u,-:--;:-r1!-.

¶58

ALLOWING THE MACMA

¶59

,,.\r-<br>Silx

¶60

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶61

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

¶62

PRESENT

¶63

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^M.LAXMAN

¶64

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANE OUS^{APPEAL NO: 3029OF 2007}

¶65

Between:

¶66

1 Vankidi Sujatha, Wo Late Satyanarayana^{House hold R/o Ookal} [H]^Village' Geesugonda Mandal, Warangal^Dist.

¶67

2 Vankidi Divya, D/o Late Satyanarayana^minor, .rep.^{by petitionerno.1R/o} Ookal [H] Village, Geesugonda Mandal,^{WarangalDist.}

¶68

R -'1 dismissed for default vide Court order^{dated 1210712016}

¶69

...APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS

¶70

AND

¶71

1 A. Samaiah S/o Sailu, age major Owner^{of Lorryand Business R/o Begumpet,} Kamanpoor Mandal, Karimnagar^Dist.

¶72

2 United lndia lnsurance Company Limited,^{Rep. by its Branch Manager,} Branch Manager, Br. office, H.No. 13-36-6/4,^{1st floor, NTPC, Jyotlrinagar,} Karimnagar

¶73

J United lndia lnsurance Companv Limited,^{Rep.by its Divisionallt/a;:;ger,} Divisional Manager United lndia'lnsurance C6mp'any^{Limited,Diviloffice,} M.G.Road, Pochamma Maidan, Warangal

¶74

4 Vankidi Shakunthala, Wo Dharmaiah Chjary^{House holdR/o Ockai} iiii Village, Geesugonda Mandal, Warangal^Dist.

¶75

4th Respondent is not a necessary^{partyto this appeal}

¶76

...RESPONDENTS

¶77

Appeal filed Under section 173 of Motor^{VehiclesAct against the orderand} decree in M.V.O.P.No.636 0f 2003 dated.05-09-2005^{0n the file of the court of the} chairman Motor Accident claims^{Tribunal-cum-IAdditionalDistrictJudEe,} Warangal.

¶78

ORDER: This appeal coming on for^{hearingand upon perusingthe grounds} of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of^{the Lower Court and the materiaipape;s} 'n the Case and upon hearing the arguments of^{M/S. JAYANTI S C SEKH'qR'} Advocate for the Appellant and of^{SRl. V KRISHNA RAO, Advocatefor the} Respondent No.2 and none appeared for the^{respondent no 3}

¶79

This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

¶80

That the MACMA No. 3029 of 2007 be and hereby is allowed by enhancing compensation from Rs. 3,60,000/- ; to Rs. 7,66,400/-;

¶81

That the compensation amount shall carry interest at 7.so/o p.a from the date of filing of the O. P. till the date of realization;

¶82

That the Respondent Nos. 'r and 3 be and hereby are joinfly and severafly Iiable to deposit the enhanced amount to the credit of o.p. along with accrued interest within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order;

¶83

4 That on such deposit, the appellant be and hereby is permitted to withdraw the entire amount in the proportions, as fixed by the Tribunal;

¶84

That the enhanced amount shall be paid to the appellant on payment of deficit Court fee on the enhanced compensation;

¶85

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

¶86

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

¶87

//TRUE COPY//

¶88

SD/. P PADMANABHA REDDY, ASSISTANT TEQISTRAR M

¶89

To,

¶90

SECTION OFFICER

¶91

1 The chairman Motor Accident claims Tribunar-cum- I Additionar District Judge, Warangal. (with records, if any)

¶92

2 Two CD Copies

tS..-

2 DRAFTS

HIGH COURT

DATED:0510912023

JUDGMENT+DECREE

MACMA.No.3029 of 2007

¶99

ALLOWING THE MACMA

Vankidi Sujatha and Another v. a. Samaiah and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vankidi Sujatha and Another v. a. Samaiah and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Sirajuddin, Vs The Central Bank of India

Nalla Ailaiah and 5 Ors. Vs the Ap State Road Transport Corporation and Anr.

Moinuddin Vs Sri Md. Akthar Hussain and Anr.

Dr. C. Yadagiri And 2 Others Vs Venkatram Rami Reddy And 15 Others

Akula Srinivas Rao and 3 Ors. Vs G.Venkateswara Sharma,Warangal

The Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Kurnoo Vs Pasham Jangaiah and 2 Others