Allowed

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

Telangana HC21 Jul 2023MACMA/3153/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court enhanced compensation awarded in a motor accident claim from Rs. 1,87,500 to Rs. 9,46,000. The court applied Supreme Court guidelines to account for the deceased's income, future prospects, loss of dependency, and consortium claims, directing the respondents to deposit the enhanced amount with interest.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced from Rs. 1,87,500 to Rs. 9,46,000 with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of filing.

Gundagoni Vijayalaxmi and 3 Others Vs M.Subba Rao… — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³²⁰⁸ I

¶2

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

¶3

FRIDAY, THE TWENry FIRST^{DAY OF JULY} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE.HONOURABLE^{SMT JUSTICEP.SREE SUOHA}

¶6

MOTOR ACCIDENT^{CIVIL MISCELLAN EOUSAPPEAL NO: 3153 OF 2009}

¶7

Appeal filed under section^{173 of M.V.Act aggrieved by the ordersdated} '16-12-2004 passed in OP.no.298^{of 2OO4} [Old^{OP.no.4 ot 2OO4)on the file of} the chairman, Motor^{Accidents claimsTribunal-cum-ll Additional District Judge,} Nalgonda, at Suryapet

¶8

Between:

¶9

Gundagoni Vijayalaxmi^{W/o. Late Yellaiah, Age: 38 years' Occ: Household.}

¶10

Gundagoni Saidulu,^{S/o. Late Yellaiah,Age:21years, Occ: Private Worker.}

¶11

Gundagoni Nagaraju,^{Sio. Late Yellaiah, Age: 20 Years, Occ: Private Worker.}

¶12

Gundagoni Mallamma,^{W/o late Yellaiah, Age: 61 Years,Occ: Household}

¶13

All are Rl/o Near Church Compound,^{SuryapetTown, Nalgonda District.}

¶14

...APPELLANTS/CLAIMANTS

¶15

AND

¶16

M. Subba Rao, S/o^{not known, aged Ma.ior, Occ: Owner of lorrybearing} no.AHH 3443^Fyo Seetharamaiah^{Cheerala post, Prakasam District.}

¶17

A.Narsaiah, S/o Muthaiah,^{aged Major, Occ: Owner of lorry bearing No'AHH} 32t43, Fl/o. No. 41-24-55,^{Krishnalanka,vijayawada}

¶18

National lnsurance^{co. Ltd., rep. by its Divisional Manager, Divisionaloffice-} ll, Opposite to Regency^{House, Somaiiguda, Hyderabad}

¶19

RRI And 2 disd for default^{vrde C.O.dt 17-7-09}

¶20

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶21

Counsel for the Appellant(s):^{Mr. CHANDRASEKHARREDDY GOPIREDDY}

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent^{No. 3: Mr. G. VISHWESHWAR REDDY}

¶23

The Court made the following:^JUDGMENT

¶24

THE IIONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE^{P.SRED SUDHA}

¶25

M.A.c. .A.No.3153 of 2OO9

¶26

JUDGM ENT:

¶27

This Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous^{Appeal is} filed under Section 173 of the Motor^{Vehicle Act,1 988} against the Judgment and Decree^{dated16. l2.2OO4 passed} in O.P.No.298 of 2OO4^(old O.P.No.4^{of 2OO4l passed by the} learned Chairmart, Motor Vehicles Accidents^Claims Tribunal-cum-Il Additional District Judge, Nalgonda at Suryapet.

¶28

The Original Petition in O.P.No.298 of 2O04 (old O.P.No.4 of 2OOal was filed by appellants/petitioners claiming compensation of Rs.3,00,O00/ - for death of Gundagani Yellaiah (here-in-after referred AS 'deceased'), who died in the motor vehicle accident occurred on l0.l 1.2003. Appellant No.1 is the wife, appellant No.2 and 3 are children and appellaflt No.4 is the mother of the deceased. The trial Court after considering the arguments of both sides, granted compensation only to an exten t of

¶29

¶30

Rs. 1,87,5OO/-. Aggrieved^{by the said Judgmentand} decree, they^{preferred the present appeal'}

¶31

As the present appeal^{ispreferredonly for} enhancement of the^{compensationamount granted by the} trial Court, this Court^{is not going into other details.}

¶32

The learned Counsel for^{the appellants} / petitioners contended that^as on the^{date of accident, the} age of the deceased^{was 38 years and he was lorry cleaner} and earning Rs.4,OOO/-^{per month. Therefore,requested} the Court to modify the^{award passed by the trial Court.}

¶33

Admittedly, the^{deceased was lorry cleaner.} Considering the age and occupation^{of the deceased, this} Court finds that it is^just and^{reasonableto take the salary} of the deceased as Rs.4,000/-,^{as such his annualincome} would be Rs.48,000/- (Rs.4000 x 12).

¶34

As per the guidelines of the^{Hon'ble Apex Court} ln dictum of Sarla Verrna Vs. Delhi^Transport

¶35

¶36

Corporatiott^t if the deceased was married, 1/4th^{of his} income has to be deducted as there^are 4^{dependents i.e.,} |2,OOO/- towards his personal expenses.^{Thus, the annual} income of the deceased aJter deducting^personal expenses would come to Rs.36,0OO/- per arlnum^(Rs.48,00O- 12,000:Rs.36,0O0/-) and the Hon'ble Apex Court in the dictum of National Insurdnce Compang Limited.^Vs. Pronag Sethiz, held that the future^prospects of income of the self-employed 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. l4,4OO /^- has to be added towards future prospects and thus the amount would become Rs.50,400/- (Rs.36,O00⁺ Rs.14,400 = Rs.5O,4O0l-). This sum if multiplied with the multiplier 15 applicable to the age of the deceased is 40 years, it u,ould come to Rs.07,56,00O/- (Rs.50,a00 X 15 Rs.O7,56,O0O/ -). Thus, appellants are entitled to Rs.07,56,000/- under the head 'I-oss of Dependency'.

¶37

' 1:ooo1^{r, sccDt}

¶38

'(:otr)^{ro scc oSo}

¶39

¶40

Besides, appellants^{are also entitled for} compensation under 'conventional^{heads'as prescribedin} the dictum of Nationat /llsurance^{Compang Limited Vs'} Pranag Sethi, i.e., Rs.^{15,0O0/- towards loss of Estate and} Rs. l5,0OO/- towards funeral^{charges and Rs.4O,OOO/- to} the first appellant towards^{spousal consortium.}

¶41

F\rther, the Hon'ble^{Supreme Court,by} reiterating the comprehensive^{interpretationof 'consortium'} given in the authority of Magma General^Inslr?dnce Compang Llmited as. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru^{Rann &} other*, and in the authority between^{United India} Insurance Compang Llmited as. Satinder^Kaur @ Satruainder Kqur o:nd, other*, fortified that the^amounts for loss of consortium shall be awarded^to the^{children q'ho} lose the care and protection of their^pa-rents as^'parental consortium' and to the parents as, 'filiai consortium'^{for the} loss of their grown-up children, to compensate their^agonY, love and affection, care and companionship of deceased children. Accordingly, it is^just and reasonable to arvard

¶42

t (rors) rs scc no '(2020)⁹ scc⁶⁴⁴

¶43

¶44

Rs.40,OO0/- each to appellants^{No.2 and 3 as parental} consortium and Rs.40,000/- to^{appellant No.4 towards} filial consortium

¶45

Therefore, appellants/petitioners^{are entitled for}

¶46

the compensation in the following^terms:

¶47

1	Loss ofdependency	Rs.07,56,000/-
2	Conventionalheads	Rs.7O,O00/-
3	ParentalConsortium forchildren (@Rs.4O,0OO -each	Rs.80,000/-
4	FiiialConsortium for parent@ Rs.40,OO0/-	Rs.40,0OO/-
	TOTAL	Rs.9,zt6,OOO/-

¶48

Accordingly, this Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed by enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.O1,87,500/- to Rs.09,46,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs Fourff Six Thousand only) with interest at the rate of 7.5%o per annum from the date of liting the petition till date of realization Respondent shall deposit the entire amount within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. On such deposit, all the appellants

¶49

¶50

are permitted to withdraw the said amolrnt along with interest accrued on it. Out of total compensation amount, appellants No.2 to 4 are entitled to Rs.SO,OOO/- each and appellant No.l is entitled to remaining amor-rnt. Appellants are directed to pay the deficit Court fee on the enhanced amount. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶51

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand

¶52

closed

¶53

Sd/- P. CH.^{NAGABHUSHAMBA} ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR

To,

//TRUE coPY/'

oFFlcER 'EcrloN

The Chairman,^{MotorAccidents Claims Tribunal-cum-ll AdditionalDistrict} Judge, Nalgonda,^{at Suryapet (with records)} -

¶58

2 or"" iC-t"" sni.^{cnnirombEKHAR REDDYGoPIREDDY'Advocate} toPUCl

¶59

J, 5;"t"6 to SRl.^{VIsHWESHwARREDDY, Advocate[oPUC]} 4. Two CD CoPies

KP,'VI{

HIGH COURT

DATED: 2110712023

JUDGMENT

,!
ri
ItifI
r,) 2g rts
i
* ./
* ;/
o€spalr.;

¶66

MACMA.No.3153 of 2009

¶67

ALLOWING THE MACMA

¶68

ccad"a ffi"

¶69

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶70

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

¶71

PRESENT

¶72

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

¶73

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MI SCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 3153 OF 2009

¶74

Between:

¶75

Gundagoni Vijayalaxmi Wio. Late Yellaiah, Age: 38 years, Occ: House hold.

¶76

Gundagoni Saidulu, S/o. Late Yellaiah, Age:21 years, Occ: Private Worker.

¶77

Gundagoni Nagaraju, S/o. Late Yellaiah, Age: 20 Years, Occ: Private Worker.

¶78

Gundagoni lvlallamma, W/o late Yellaiah, Age: 6'l Years, Ooc: House hold

¶79

All are Fl/o Near Church Compound, Suryapet Town, Nalgonda District.

¶80

...APPELLANTS/C LAIMANTS

¶81

AND

¶82

M. Subba Rao, S/o not known, aged Major, Occ: Owner of lorry bearing no.AHH 3443 Ryo Seetharamaiah Cheerala post, Prakasam District.^'

¶83

A.Narsaiah, S/o Muthaiah, aged Major, Occ: Owner of lorry bearing No.AHH 3443, Ryo. No. 41 -24-55, Krishnalanka, Vijayawada.

¶84

National lnsurance Co. Ltd. , rep. by its Dlvisional Manager, Divisional Officell, Opposite to Regency House, Somaliguda, Hyderabad RR1 And 2 disd for default vide C.O. dt 17-7-Og

¶85

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶86

Appeal filed under section 173 of M.V.Act aggrieved by the orders dated 16-12-2004 passed in OP.no 298 o'f 2OO4 [Old OP.no. 4 of 2OO4l on the file of the Chairman, Molor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-ll Additional District Judge, Nalgonda, at Suryapet

¶87

ORDER: This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and the material paper in the case and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. Chandrasekhar Reddy Gopireddy, Advocate for the Appellant and of Mr. G. Vishweshwar Reddy, Advocate for Respondent No- 3 and the Respondent No 1 & 2 not appeared either in person or by Advocate.

¶88

F,l

¶89

This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

¶90

¶91

l That the Motor Accident civir Misceraneous Appear be and hereby is alowed by enhancing the compensation amount from Rs. 01,g7,s0o/_ to Rs. 09,46'000/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs Fourty six Thousand onry) with interest at the rate of 7 5% per annum from the date of firing the petition ti, date of realization;

¶92