Allowed

Nalla Ushaiah and Anr. v. Shaik Qurshid and Anr.

Telangana HC21 Jul 2023MACMA/3120/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed a Motor Accident Claims Appeal filed by the appellants claiming compensation for the death of their son. The Court enhanced the compensation from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.11,09,600/- including future prospects of the deceased and ordered the respondents to pay with interest.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.11,09,600/- with interest at 7.5% per annum.

Nalla Ushaiah and Anr. Vs Shaik Qurshid and Anr. — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

¶5

MAcMA NO.3120 0F 2008

¶6

Appeal filed under Section 173 of^{M.V.Act,aggrievedby the order and} decree dated 18.06,2007 made in OP^{228 OF 2006, on the file of the Court of} lhe Chairman, Motor Vehicle^{AccrdentClaims Tribunal-cum- Principal District} Judge Medak at Sangareddy.

¶7

Between

¶8

Nalla Ushaiah S/o Laxmaiah

¶9

Smt Nalla Yadammma^{W/o Ushaiah} Appellants/Claimants

¶10

AND

¶11

Shaik Ourshid S/o Shaik Gudu^{Saheb, Occ: Ownerof Auto No.AP 23V} 995 Resident of^{Nizampetvillage, Narayankhed Mandal, Medak District}

¶12

United lndia^{lnsurance Company Limited rep. by its Branch Manager,} Branch Office D.No.5-2-1712,^{Main Road,Near New Bus Stand,} Sangareddy, Medak^District

¶13

.. Respondents/Respondents

¶14

Counsel for the Appellant(s):^{Mr.Molugu KrishnaReddy,Advocate} Counsel for the^{RespondentNo.2 : Mr.N.MohanKrishna, Advocate}

¶15

The Court delivered the^{followingJUDGMENT:}

¶16

¶17

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDTIA

¶18

M.A.C.M.A.No.3120 of 2OO8

¶19

JUDGMENT:

¶20

This Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal 1S filed under Section L73 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 against the Judgment and Decree dated 18.06.2007 passed in O.P.No.228 of 2006 passed by the learned Chairman, Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Medak, Sangareddy District.

¶21

The Original Petition in O.P.No.22B of 2O06 was filed by appellants/petitioners claiming comperrsation of Rs.5,OO,0O0/- for death of their son Nalia Venkatesham (here-in-after referred as 'deceased'), who died in the motor vehicle accident occurred on 26.11.2005. The tria-l Court after considering the arguments of both sides, granted compensation only to an extent of Rs.1,OO,00O/-. Aggrieved by the said Judgment, they preferred the present appeal.

¶22

As the present appeal IS preferred only for enhalcement of the compensation amount granted by the trial Court, this Court is not going into other details.

¶23

¶24

04 . The learned Counsel for the appellarts / petitioners contended that as on the date of accident, the age of the deceased was 30 years and he was working as Teacher in ZP High School, Somakkapet on fixed salary of Rs.1,200/- per month for first one year and that he would have got monthly salary of Rs. 1O,0OO/- on completion of apprentice. Therefore, requested the Court to modify the award passed by the trial Court.

¶25

Admittedly, he was working as Teacher in ZPHS, Somakkapet. PW3 was examined to prove his employment and the petitioner further stated that he will get salary of Rs. 1O,O0O/- but after completion of apprentice but he worked in the school for I 1 months and died in the accident. Considering the age and occupation of the deceased, this Court finds that it is just and reasonable to take the salary of the deceased as Rs.7,OOO/-, as such his annual income would be Rs.8a,OOO/- (Rs.7OOO x 12)

¶26

As per the guidelines of the Hon'ble Apex Court in dictum of Sarla Vertna Vs. Delhi Transport

¶27

)

¶28

Corporation,^t if the deceased was unmarried, % of his income has to be deducted as his personal expenses. Thus, the annual income of the deceased after deducting personal expenses would come to Rs.42,000/- per annum (Rs.84,oOO-50% Rs.a2,O00/-) and the Hon'ble Apex Court in the dictum of National Insurance Compang Limited Vs. Pranag Sethiz, held that the future prospects of income of the deceased shall also be included in determination of the compensation. Thus, considering the age of the deceased , 4Oo/o of the income i.e., Rs. 16,800 I - has to be added towards future prospects and thus the amount would become Rs.58,8OO/- (Rs.42,00O + Rs.16,80O : Rs.58,800). This sum if multiplied with the multiplier 17 applicable to the age of the deceased i.e., 30, it would come to Rs.9,99,600/- (Rs.58,8o0 X 17 = Rs.9,99,600/-). Thus, appellants are entitled to Rs.9,99,600/- under the head 'Loss of Dependency'.

¶29

Besides, appellants are also entitled for arr amount of Rs.8O,OOO/- under the head tilial

¶30

I 1u^{oooy o scc rzr} r 1zor) ro sc:c eto

¶31

¶32

compensation'. The appeliants are also entitled^for compensation under 'conventional heads' as^prescribed in the dictum of Na:tional htsurantce Compang Limited^Vs. Pranag Sethi, i.e., Rs. 15,000/- towards^{funeral charges} and Rs. 15,000/ - towards transportation.

¶33

Therefore, appellants/^{petitionersare entitled for}

¶34

the compensation in the^{following terms:}

¶35

1	Lossofdependency	Rs.9,99,600/-
c	Conventionalheads	Rs.3o,OO0/-
J	FilialConsortium^forParents@ Rs.4O ooo -each	Rs.80,OO0/-
	TOTAL	Rs.11,09,6O0/-

¶36

Accordingly, this^{Motor Accident Civil} Miscellaneous Appeal^{isallowed byenhancing the} compensation arnount^from Rs.1,O0,0OO/-^to Rs.11,09,600/-^{(Rupees Eleven Lakhs NineThousand Six} Hundred only) with^{interest at the rate of 7 -5o/o per annum} from the date of filing^{the petition till date of realization'} Respondent Nos.¹ and^{2 are jointly and severallyliable to} pay compensation and^{respondentNo'2/Insurance}

¶37

¶38

Company shall deposit the entire amotrnt within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. On such deposit, both the appellants are permitted to withdraw the said .rnorrra along with interest accrr.ed on it. Appellants are

¶39

directed to pay the dehcit Court fee on the enhalced

¶40

amount. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶41

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stald

¶42

closed.

¶43

Sd/. P.CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSTSTANT REGJSTRAR ,? SECTION OFFICER

¶44

//TRUE COPY//

¶45

To,

¶46

The Chairman, Motor V_ehicle Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- principal ^^{DistrictJudge Medak at Sangareddy (wirn ieioiJs)} 2 One CC to Mr.Molugu Krishna ReOdf, Advocate

¶47

9 9n" 91^{N.Mohan Krishna, Advocate,Advocate}

¶48

Two CD Copies

/t,r,tr

NJB

HIGH COURT

DATED: 21.07.2023

JUDGMENT+ DECREE

MACMA.No.3120 of 2008

¶55

,. :.''-:.{e --'..-- s =a-=--' ,'.i I
:.;-
,y
it 2 B u[,1 ?m

¶56

ALLOWING THE MACMA, WITHOUT COSTS

¶57

<br>o\ra

¶58

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶59

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶60

PRESENT

¶61

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

¶62

MACMA NO.3120 0F 2008

¶63

Between:

¶64

1 . Nalla Ushaiah S/o Laxmaiah

¶65

Smt Nalla Yadammma W/o Ushaiah

¶66

Appellants/Claimants

¶67

ANO

¶68

1 Shaik Qurshid S/o Shaik Gudu Saheb, Occ: Owner of Auto No.AP 23V 995 Resident of Nizampet village, Narayankhed Mandal, Medak District

¶69

2 United lndia lnsurance Company Limited rep. by its Branch Manager, Branch Office D.No.5-2-1712, Main Road, Near New Bus Stand, Sangareddy, Medak District

¶70

Respondents/Respondents

¶71

Appeal filed under Section 173 of M.V. Act, aggrieved by the order and decree dated^'18.06.2007 made in OP 228 OF 2006, on the^{file of the Court of} the Chairman, Motor Vehicie Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- Principal District Judge Medak at Sangareddy.

¶72

This appeal coming on for hearing and upon^perusing the^grounds of appeal, the Order and Decree of the Court below, the material^papers in the Original^Petition and upon hearing the arguments of^lrr'lr Molugu Krishna Reddy,^{Advocate for the} Appellant and Mr. N.Mohan Krishna, Advocate for the Respondent No.2^.

¶73

This Court doth order and Decree as follows:

¶74

1 . That this Appeal be and hereby is allowed;

¶75

That the compensation amount is enhanced from^Rs.1 ,00,0001^to Rs.11,09,600t (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Nine Thousand Six^Hundred only)^with interest at the rate of 7.Sok^per annum from the date of filing the^petitiontill date of realization;

¶76

That Respondent Nos.1 and 2 arc^jointly and severally liable to^pay compensation and respondent No.2/lnsurance 5 Company shall deposit^the

¶77

entire amount within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment:

¶78

That on such deposit, both the appellants are permitted to withdraw the said amount along with interest accrued on it;

¶79

That Appellants are directed to pay the deficit court fee on the enhanced amount

¶80

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

¶81

Sd/- P.CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶82

To,

¶83

SECTI o OFFICER

¶84

The Chairman. Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal_cum_ principal District Judge Medak at sangaredoy (wiir, i.ioijr l^'"-

¶85

2 Two CD Copies *\P/

HIGH COURT

i I

DATED: 21.07.2023

JUDGMENT+DECREE

MACMA.No.3120 of 2008

¶91

ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS

¶92

"ru3
)3
\3

Nalla Ushaiah and Anr. v. Shaik Qurshid and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nalla Ushaiah and Anr. v. Shaik Qurshid and Anr.

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

V.Mangamma Vs M/S.v.N.S.Transport and Anr.

Md. Osman, Nalgonda District and Another Vs Ganta Venkataiah, Hyderabad and Another

V.Ramulu Vs M/S.v.N.S.Transport and Anr.

Gundagoni Vijayalaxmi and 3 Others Vs M.Subba Rao and 2 Others

M. Balraj Vs B. Bharathi and Another

K. Shankaraiah Vs Apsrtc., and Another