Partly allowed

The a.P.S.R.T.C., v. P. Rajamani

Telangana HC10 Oct 2023MACMA/3130/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court decided two appeals regarding compensation for the death of P. Ravi in a motor vehicle accident. The Court allowed the claimants' appeal to enhance the award from Rs. 21.85 lakhs to Rs. 32.99 lakhs by adding future prospects loss based on the Pranay Sethi precedent. It dismissed the RTC's appeal questioning the accident. Interest at 6% per annum was directed.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs. 32,99,000 with interest at 6% per annum; RTC directed to deposit amount within 45 days.

The a.P.S.R.T.C., Vs P. Rajamani — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

TUESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF OCTOBER rWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY IHREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY MACMA No: 3130 of 2O14 and 278 of 2023

¶6

MACMA No: 3130 ot 2014

¶7

Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vechile Act., against the Award and Decree dated 08.05.2023 passed in M.V.O.P. No.1487 of 2011 on the file of the Court of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-the Court of the Chief Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad.

¶8

Between:

¶9

The A.P.S.R.T.C., Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director, Bus Bhavan, RTC X Roads, Musheerabad, Hyderabad500 020.

¶10

The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C.,, Hakimpet Depot, R.R.District.

¶11

...Appellants/Respondents.

¶12

AND

¶13

P. Rajamani, Wo. Late P.Ravi Occ Household FUo. H.No.1-64611l25lA,Old No.6-39/44),Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad).

¶14

Kum. P.Swapna,, Wo. Late P.Ravi Occ Student, R/o. H.No. 1-646111281A, Old No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶15

Kum. P.pavani,, Wo. Late P.Ravi Occ Student, R/o. H.No. 1-646111281A, Old No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶16

Kum. P.Meghana, Wo. Late P.Ravi Occ Student, R/o. H.No. 1-646111281A, Old No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶17

P.Ramaiah,, S/o. Late P.Rangaiah, Occ Retired R/o. H.No 1-64611/2814. Old No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶18

P. Gangamma,, Wo.P. Ramaiah, Occ Household R/o. H.No .^'l-6- West

¶19

46/1/2814, Old No. 6-39/44), Penta Reddy Nagar, Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶20

(Respondents Nos.2 to 4 being minors rep. by their Mother and Natural Guardian, the lst Respondent)

¶21

...Respondents/Petitioners.

¶22

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2014^(MACMAMP. NO: 3109 OF 2014)

¶23

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the execution of decree and all further proceedings passed in OP.no. 1487 ol 2O11 d|.08/05/20'1 3 on the file of the Ii/ACT-Chief Judge., CCC., Hyderabad

¶24

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2014(MACMAMP. NO: 3365 OF 2014)

¶25

Between:

¶26

P. Rajamani, Wo. Late P.Ravi Occ Household R/o. H.No.1-64611l28lA,Old No.6-39/44),Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad).

¶27

Kum. P.Swapna,, W/o. Late P.Ravi Occ Student, R/o. H.No. 1-6461112814, Old No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶28

Kum. P.Pavani,, Wo. Late P.Ravi Occ Student, R/o. H.No. 1-646111281A, Old No. 6-39144, Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶29

Kum. P.Meghana, W/o. Late P.Ravi Occ Student, R/o. H.No. 1-646111281A, Old No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶30

P.Ramaiah,, S/o. Late P.Rangaiah, Occ Retired Rio. H.No.^'l-6- 46111281A, Old No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶31

P. Gangamma,, Wo.P. Ramaiah, Occ Household R/o. H.No. 1-6461112814, Old No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶32

(Respondents Nos. 2 to 4 being minors rep. by their Mother and Natural Guardian, the lst Respondent)

¶33

...Petitioners /Respondents.

¶34

AND

¶35

'l . The A.P.S.R.T.C., Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director, Bus Bhavan, RTC X Roads, [\4usheerabad, Hyderabad500 020.

¶36

The Depot Manager, A.P.S-R.T.C.,, Hakimpet Depot, R.R.District.

¶37

... Respondents/Petitioners.

¶38

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim stay order passed in IVACMA.lUP.no. 3109 of 2014 in IMACIVA(SR).No. 9764 of 2014, dl. 2610612014 in the interest of^justice

¶39

Counsel for the Appellants:Sri. C Sunilkumar Reddy

¶40

(sc FoR APSRTC)

¶41

Counsel for the Respondents: Sri K V L Jayasimha

MACMANo:278 of 2O23

Between:

'1 . P. Rajamani, W/o. Late P.Ravi Occ Household Fl/o. H.No.1-64611l25lA,Old No.6-39/44),Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad).

¶46

Kum. P.Swapna,, Wo. Late P.Ravi Occ Student, R/o. H.No.^'l-6- 46111281A., Old No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶47

Kum. P.pavani,, Wo. Late P.Ravi Occ Student, R/o. H.No.^1-6- 46111281A, Old No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶48

Kum. P.lt/eghana, Wo. Late P.Ravi Occ Student, R/o.^{H.No. 1-6-} 46111281A, Old No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar,^West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶49

5, P.Ramaiah,, S/o. Late P.Rangaiah, Occ Retired R/o. H.No.^1-6- 46111281A, Old No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶50

6, P. Gangamma,, Wo.P. Ramaiah, Occ Household R/o. H.No.^1-6- 46111281A, Old No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶51

(Respondents Nos. 2 to 4 being minors rep. by their Mother and Natural Guardian, the lst Respondent)

¶52

...Petitioners /Claimants.

¶53

AND

¶54

The A.P.S.R.T.C., Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director, Bus Bhavan, RTC X Roads, l\4usheerabad, Hyderabad500 020.

¶55

fhe Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C.,, Hakimpet Depot, R.R.District.

¶56

... Respondents/Petitioners.

¶57

Counsel for the Appellants: Sri K V L Jayasimha

¶58

Counsel for the Respondents: Sri. C Sunilkumar Reddy (sc FoR APSRTC)

¶59

The Court made the following: COMMON JUDGMENT:

¶60

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

¶61

M.A M.A. .313() of 20 4 27a of 2023

¶62

COMMON JUDGMENT: lt)er Hon,bte Si Justice p.Sem Kosha)

¶63

IJeard Sri Thoom Srinivas, learned standing counscl for TSRTC and learned counsel Sri K.V.L.Jayasimha tor the claimants.

¶64

M.A. C.M.A_No-3130 of 2O14 is an appeal by the insrrrance companJ. and M.A.C.IVI.A_No.27g of 2023 is an appeat by the r:laimants. Considering the fact that the two appeals arises out of the same award between the same parties, we have decided to take up the two appeals together and decide the same by this common .ludgment

¶65

The facts of the case leading to filing of two Appeals was, the MVOP No. t4g7 of 2O 1 1 filed under Section. 1 66 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1 98g by the wife, children, father and mother of the deceased_ P.Ravi, claiming compensation of Rs.gg,g7,0OO/- on account of death of the deceased in a motor vehicle fatal accident. That on O2.12.2O1O, when the deceased was travelling on his two wheeler vehicle bearing registration No.Ap_29E-6O05 to go to Kowkoor, on the rvay, when he reached near Kowkoor Milk Centre, one ApSRTC Bus bearing registration No.Ap_1 7Z_2g74 of Hakimpet Bus Depo

¶66

¶67

)

¶68

beir-rg driver-'^{by its clriverat a trigh speed in rash ertld negltgent} manner came^{liotn opposite ciircctionand d'asheclthe vchicle oi the} deceasec{.^{As a result, the deccased Ravi recei"'ed bleeding rnjurtes} on his head^{anclserious injuries all over the body-Imrnediately'the} deceasedu,asshlftedtoApolloHospital,Secunderabad,wherehe succumbecltoinjurreson04.l2'2ol0whileundergoingtreatment. The Police, Alwal^{Police Statton haclregisterccl a casc inCrime} No.677of^{20lO under Section3O4-Aand 337 of iPC against the} drtver of^{the bus.}

¶69

According^{to the clatnants, the deceased was aged 35 years} as on the^{oate of accident and earninga sum of Rs'56'25O/per} month by^{doing milk businessand used to supplymilk to Kou'koor} Coopcrative^{Milk Society an<l contributing his earnings to the} claimants.

¶70

The respondents/RTC^{liled counter denyingthe aiiegations} made in the^{claim petition and also deniedthe manner of} occurrence of^{accident, the age and incomeof the deceasedand} disputed^{the claim of claimants'}

¶71

On the basis^{of the abovepleadings'the Court below framed} the following^issues:

¶72

1r./d / ,1../

¶73

¶74

i) Whethcr thc pleadcd^{accidcnthad occurred resulting in} tlLc cleath of the dcceased^{P.Ravi,due lo the rashand} ncgligent dr iving of thc motor^{vehicie (APSRTCBus bearing} rcgistration No.AP-11 Z-2914)^{by its driver?}

¶75

ii) Whether rhc petitioner are entitled to^{anycompensation} and. if so, at what quantum and^{what is the liability of the} respondents ?

¶76

iii) To what relief ?

¶77

In order to substantiate the^{case, P.Ws.I to 5 were examined} and Exs.A1 to^{A13 were marked on behalf of the ciaimantsOn} bctralf ol the^{RTC,P.W. I was examined and no documents were} marked on^{its behalf}

¶78

The Tribunal, on conch-rsion of^{the pleadingsandevidence} placed on record by the^{parties,uideimpugned awardheld that the} claimants to be^{entitled for compensationof Rs.21,85,000} I^and the liability of^{paymentof compensation was fastenedupon the} RTC.

¶79

g. The primary ground of challenge by the^{RTC inMACMA} No.313O of 2074^{was firstly, so far as doubtingthe accident itself,} in which the deceased died^{and secondly,the qualtum of} compensation^{awarded by the Tribunal.}

¶80

MACMA^{No.278of 2023 is an appealflled by the claimants} seeking for enharcement of^{compensation.The primary ground}

¶81

;i "-i... j€

¶82

I 'i,^''rr 1

¶83

seeking for^{enhancementoi compensatlon was that the Tnbunal} has hrstly not^{awarded the compensation as claimcdby the} claimants and^{seconrlly, the Tribunal I'rad erred in r-rot awarding} the future^{prospectsof the deceased so also the medical expenses} spent by the^{ciaimants during thc [reatlnentof the deceased-}

¶84

As regards^{the contentionof the RTCin MACMANo 3130 of} 2014 is concerned,^{itLrasbcen argued by the learr-red standing} counsel for the^{RTC that from the peruszrlof thc plcaclingsand} evidence,^{which has comeoll record,there appears to be many} missing links to^{establishand prove that the deceased-P Ravi died} of an accident. It^{was the contentionof the itTC that lhereis no} material made^{avarlable beflore thc Tribunal so as to establishthat} the deceased^{had dicd on accolrnt of injuries suffered from a road} accident.Further,therewasalsonomedicaldocumcntsavailable with the claimant^{to establishthat the deceasedwasimmediately} hospitalized or^{taken to a hospitaland in the courseof treatment'} he had succumbed.

¶85

Comrng to^{the irrst groundraised by the RTC i e , doubting} the acciderrt that^{occurredon O2.l2 2OlO, we hnd that the RTC} has failed in^{discharge its obligations so faras provingthe} contentions raised^{by it by placingcogent,substantial material and} evidence in support^{of its contention The RTC, exceptfor leading}

¶86

¶87

,\t.,'li/] :.t lt \t1 ,1' j it).t :t)t r .,

¶88

thc evidcnce o1 RW. 1, who is driver of the RTC Bus, have not led at-r_r"' othcr cvidcrrr.r: to sLlbstantiate tl-rc other grounds raised by thctn so krr as tlrc entire tnattcr arising out of a falsely implicatecl casc. Thc RTC fiLrt her was not in a position to produce any lnatlrrial lrom the Apolto I Iospital. where the deceased was said to h.rve becr.t takcn frrr treatmcnt immediatcly after the accident so as to cstablish that the deceased was r-rot taken to the hospital, as has becr-r conrcnded bv the RTC.

¶89

PW.5-G. Srisailam Yadav, rvho has becn examined as an eye witness, has catcgorically stated in his chief-examination that on the date of accide:tt he was present by the side of the road near to Kou,koor Milk Cooperativc Societ1,, at that time the offending Bus camc in rash and ncgligent manncr and dashed the two wheeler of thc deceased, who was carrying mrlk cans on his vehicle, and that imrnediately he was shifted to Apollo Hospital, Secunderabad. Police had examined him and recorded his statement. In his cross_ examination, nothing was elicited to disprove his evidence.

¶90

In the absence of any material on the part of RTC, it is ditficuit to accept the contention of doubting the accident and the accidental death of the deceased said to have taken place on O4.12.2O1O. The said ground raised by the RTC thus stands ansu,ered in the negative.

\i.

15.^{Coming to thc appcal in \IACM'\ No 27tt ol'2O2:'' filcd br {hc} claimants,^{on per-usal of thec tltire aua rd ' we lir rcl thalr he Triburlal} had erred^{in not awarding o[ '1001'ol' the incoureof the decelrsed} torvards^{loss of future prospc(:ts ir-r vicrt of tht: rlecisi<'rl of Holl ble}

¶95

National^{Insurance Co'Ltd'' vs' Pranay Sethi and othersl'}

¶96

Hon blc^{AP' rCourt aI} 16. In^{PranaY Sethi (suPra)' thc} paragraph-S9^{4 had I'rc1d as rtuder:}

¶97

"59.4.^{In case the dr:c:trased u as scltlctrtplovedtrt ott a} fixer1 salary,^{an additiorrof 4oul' ol the establishecl tttcome} shoultlbetheu'arrantt'herctllctlecezrsctl\vasb('lo\'the age of^{4O years An addition of 25')'uwhcrcthe ricr:cased} was between^{the argeo[ 40 to 50 \ carsarrcl] O'l'u u'lrcrethc} deceased^{was between the agc of 50 to 60-v-earsshorrlcl} be rcgarded^{as the necessarymt:thod of cornputatior.r- The} established^{income tnearrsthc incomc minuslhc tax} coInPonent."

¶98

17 . In^{view of the above decision 'we are ofr he consldered} opinion^{that since the age of the deceased was 35 'ears as on the} date of^{the accident,anaddition of 4Onl' of the incomeof the} deceased^{be addedtowards his future prospects'}

¶99

18.^{Considering the .ludgment of Hon'blc Apex Oourt in Pranay} Sethi, at^{paragtapr.-S2,the claimants are entitled to an amountof}

¶100

'^{(zotz) re scc eao}

¶101

¶102

r,\i. /n/..!l. ',^{t 1a,rl.t.\t,,j ) :o,)t :tlI I i} : x,/ :0)^, 7

¶103

t I

¶104

Rs.40,000/ each towarcls consorrium, Rs.15,OOO/ towards loss of estatc, Rs.15,000/- torvards funer:rl expenses on conventional he:rds.

¶105

The contention raisecl by the lcarncd counsel for clai mants / appclla nt descrves to be allolved to thc above cxtent. We are of the considered opinion that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal on other head i.e., transport charges would remain same

¶106

In view of the above, we proceed to make the calculations keeping in view the mandate of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra):

¶107

Sl.No	Head	Compensatiorlawarded
I	Lossofdependcncy	Its.28,s0,000/[Rs.]6,000/xt2x15) mrnusone'fourthi.e,Rs7,2O,O00/,which .:omestoRs.2l,6(),OOO/-
2	Futureprospects	RS.8,64,OOO/ti.e..4o"/oofannuat rncome1.e.,Rs.2r,60,000/)
3	Total lossofdependency	Rs.3O,24,OOO/-(Rs.2I,60,000/- Rs.8,64,000/) +
4	Compensation transport towards	Rs.5,OoO/-
5	Compensationfor lossof consqrtium(Rs.4O,000/-x6)	Rs.2,4o,ooo/-
6	Lossofestate	Rs.l5,oOO,/-
7	Funeralexpenses	Rs. 15,OOO,/-
	Totalcom nsationtobe aid	Rs.32,99,OOO/-

''E-4,. 1*.. . ffi

:r'r'r

21.^{The totai compensation'whichbecornespayableto the} claimants^{is enirancedfromRs'21'85'OO0/ to Rs'32'99'O00/''The} enhanced^{amount shall alsocarry interestttt'' 6oit per nrrtru nr fronr} the^{dateof the claim petitionmadc beforethe Tribur-raltiil the date} of the^{actual payment The RTC is directedto ensure thatthe} entire^{amountof compensation is depositecl witl'rin the outer limit} of 45^{days from the date of receipt of copy of thrs ordcr' dul]'} adjusting^{the amountalready paid bY the RTC TheL atioof} apportionment^{of amountsamong the appellarlts/..laimrrntsanrl} the^{permissionto withdrawai shall be in lerms of the ar't'ard passed} by the^{Tribunal- Thereshall be no order as to cosls'}

¶113

22.^{ln the result' MACMANo 3130 of 2014 stands dismissed and} MACMA^{No 278 of2O23standsallowed in partThere shall be no}

¶114

order^{as to costs'}

¶115

23.^{Pending miscellaneousappiications ' if any' shallstand}

¶116

closed.

¶117

ass8tifrrvi?3't+RtR^'/ Llol-' //TRUE^COPY//

¶118

SECTION^OFFICER

¶119

To, ch ier^{J u d} se'^{citv civi I}

¶120

ncciaent ftr,fffi : :rTil :Xfi

¶121

, U",,y.,li!

¶122

One^{CC to Sri' C SunilkumarReddy(SCFOR APSRTC) IOPUCI}

¶123

3.OneCCtoSri'KVLJayasimha'AdvocateIOPUC]

¶124

Two^{CD CoPies'}

¶125

tat. N U-

¶126

I i

-" .- -8 -.i

,. ". ': 4'

\i, 'l=

HIGH^COURT

DATED:10/10/2023

COMMON^JUDGMENT

MACMA.Nos.3130^{of 2014} and 278^{of 2O23}

¶135

I t{e STAl€
q
o(jf, 22 N0! 2021 fi
t
t
D Es P

¶136

MACMANo.3130^{ot2014 is Dismissed} And ilntrrrn^{No.278 ot 2o23 is Partly Allowed'}

¶137

\ qb
I 1ft
I

¶138

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶139

TUESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶140

PRESENT

¶141

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY

¶142

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

¶143

MACMA No: 3130 of 2014 and 278 ot 2023

¶144

MACMA No:3130 of 2014

¶145

Between:

¶146

The A.P.S.R.T.C., Rep. by its Vice Chairman and ltilanaging Director, Bus Bhavan, RTC X Roads, Musheerabad, Hyderabad500 020.

¶147

The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C.,, Hakimpet Depot, R.R.District.

¶148

...Appellants/Respondents.

¶149

AND

¶150

P. Rajamani, Wo. Late P.Ravi Occ Household R/o. H.No.1-64611l28lA,Old No.6-39/44),Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad).

¶151

Kum. P.Swapna,, Wo. Late P.Ravi Qcc Student, R/o. H.No.^'1-6- 46111281A, Old No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶152

Kum. P.pavani,, W/o. Late P.Ravi Occ Student, R/o. H.No.^'1-6- 46111281A, Old No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶153

Kum. P.tt4eghana, Wo. Late P.Ravi Occ Student, R/o. H.No. 1-646111281A, Old No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶154

P.Ramaiah,, S/o. Late P.Rangaiah, Occ Retired R/o. H.No.^'1 -646111281A, Old No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶155

P. GangammA,, Wo.P. Ram-ajah, Occ Househo[d R/o. H.No. 1-646111281A, OId No. 6-39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, West Venkatapuram, Alwal, Secunderabad)

¶156

(Resoondents Nos. 2 to 4 being minors rep.^{by their Mother and Natural} bu"idian, the lst^ResPondent)

¶157

... Respondents/Petitioners.

¶158

MACMA No:278^{of 2023}

¶159

Between:

¶160

1 P. Raiamani,^{W/o. Late P.Ravi Occ Household} R/o. H.No.1-6461112:8lA,old^{No.6-39144).Penta Reddy} Nagar, West

¶161

Venkatapuram,^{Alwal, Secunderabad).}

¶162

Kum. P.Swapna,,^{Wo. Late P.Ravi Occ Student, R/o H'No'.'1-6-} - iailizsiA, bto " t to. 6-3et44), Penta^{Reddv Nasar, west} Venkatapuram,^{Alwal, Secunderabad)}

¶163

Kum. P.pavani,,^{W/o. Late P.RaviOcc Student, R/o H'No' 1-6-} - 'iailizail, oti' No. 6-39/44), Penta Reddv Nagar, west Venkatapuram,^{Alwal, Secunderabad)}

¶164

Kum. P.Meghana,^{W/o. Late P.Ravi Occ Student,R/o H'No' 1-6-} " iailiz.aie,, "old 'No. 6'39144), Penta Reddy Nagar, west Venkatapuram,^{Alwal, Secunderabad)}

¶165

5- P.Ramaiah,,^{S/o. Late P.Rangaiah, Occ R-etiredR/o' H'No' 'l-6-} -. +dtlizaii, " on No. 6-3e144), Penta Reddv Nasar, west Venkatapuram,^{Alwal, Secunderabad)}

¶166

P. Ganqamma,, Wo.P.^{Ramaiah,Occ HouseholdR/o' H'No' 'l-6-} - qotiid(, ola No. 6-39144), Penta Reddv Nagar, west Venkatapuram,^{Alwal, Secunderabad)}

¶167

(Resoondents Nos. 2 to 4 being minors rep'^{by their Mother and Natural} buaiaian, the lst^ResPondent)

¶168

...Petitioners /Claimants.

¶169

AND

¶170

1 . The A.P.S.R.T.C.,^{Rep. by its Vice Chairman and fi/anaging} ' oliEcioi, BJs Bhavan,'RTC-X Roads, Musheerabad, Hyderabad500 020.^'

¶171

The Depot^{tVlanager, A.P.S.R.T.C.,, HakimpetDepot,R R'District'}

¶172

...ResPondents/Petitioners.

¶173

Appeals under Section^{173 of Motor Vechile Act', against the} Award and Decree^{dated 08.05.2023 passed in M'V'O'P'No'1487 of} 20'11 on the file of^{the Court of the Motor Accidents Claims}

¶174

Tribunal-cum-the Court of the Chief Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad.

¶175

ORDER: This appeals 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 Sri. C. Sunil Kumar Reddy, Advocate for the Appellants in MACMA No.31 30 of 2O14 and Advocate for the Respondents in MACMA No.278 ot 2023 and Sri. K.V.L. Jayasimha, Advocate for the Appellants in MACMA No.278 of 2023 and Advocate for the Respondents in MACMA No.31 30 of 2014.

¶176

This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

¶177

That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3130 of 2014 be and hereby is dismissed and MACMA No.278 of 2023 stands Partly allowed.

¶178

That the total compensation, which becomes payable to the claimants be and hereby is enhanced rrom Rs.21,85,000/- to Rs.32,99,000/-;

¶179

That the enhanced amount shall also carry interest @ 6%^per annum from the date of the claim petition made before the Tribunal till the date of the actual^payment;

¶180

The'RTC is directed to ensure that the entire amount of compensation is deposited with the outer limit of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, duly adjusting the amount already paid by the RTC;

¶181

That the ratio of apportionment of amounts amoung the appellants/claimants and the permission to withdrawal shall be in terms of the award^passed by the Tribunal;

¶182

That save as aforesaid, the decree^{of the LowerCourt shall} stands confirmed in all other aspects;^and

¶183

That there be no order^as to costs^{in this Appeal.}

¶184

//TRUE COPY//

¶185

Sd/- A.V.S. PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (fu

¶186

SECTION OFFICER

¶187

To,

¶188

'1 . The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

¶189

lwo CD Copies.

d^.V

HIGH COURT

DATED:10/10/2023

GOMMON DECREE

MACMA.Nos.3130 ot 2O14 and 278 ot 2023

¶195

MACMA No.3130 of 2014 is Dismissed And

¶196

MACMA No.278 of 2023 is Partly Allowed.

¶197

1k \

The a.P.S.R.T.C., v. P. Rajamani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The a.P.S.R.T.C., v. P. Rajamani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Sri Nama Nageshwar Rao

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central Vs Sri Nama Nageshwar Rao

M/S.Madhucon Projects Limited Vs Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal

Sri Hari Raju Penmatsa Vs The Commercial Tax Officer And Another

Rangu Suma and 3 Others Vs Jangam Mariyamma and 2 Others

Smt. P. Rajamani Vs A.P.S.R.T.C.