Partly allowed

P.Gangamma and 2 Others v. B.Shekar and Another

Telangana HC4 Sept 2024MACMA/150/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court partly allowed an appeal filed by the claimants against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The court enhanced the awarded compensation from Rs. 1,07,000 to Rs. 5,06,400 by recalculating the notional income and applying the correct multiplier, while regarding other heads of compensation as no orders.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced from Rs. 1,07,000 to Rs. 5,06,400 with 7.5% interest and deposit obligation within eight weeks.

P.Gangamma and 2 Others Vs B.Shekar and Another — Insurance | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

13251 |

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶6

M.A.C.M.A.No: 150 of 2009

¶7

Appeal filed under Section 173 of It/.V. Act, against the Judgment^and Decree dated. 29-07 -2008 passed in It/.V.O.P.No.410 of 2005 on the file of the Court of the Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Vlll^{Additional District} Judge, Nizamabad.

¶8

Between:

¶9

P. Gangamma, Wo P.Malla Reddy,

¶10

P. Niraja, D/o P.ltrlalla Reddy,

¶11

P. Mamatha, D/o P.lvlalla Reddy,

¶12

...AppellanUClaimants

¶13

AND

¶14

1 B.Shekar, S/o Chandraiah 2 The New lndia Assurance Company Limited, rep. by^{its Divisional Manager,} Divisional office, Opp: Zilla Parishad Office, Subashnagar,^Nizamabad.

¶15

...Respondents

¶16

Counsel for the Appellants: SRI P. RADHIVE^REDDY

¶17

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI K. SUBBA^RAO

¶18

The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

¶19

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER M.A.C.M.A.No.15O of 2Oo9

¶20

JUDGMENT:

¶21

This appeal is filed by the claimants aggrieved by the judgment daled 29.O2.20O8 in O.p.No.410 of 20O5 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunai _ cum _ VIII Additional District Judge, Nizamabad (for short the Tribunal,).

¶22

Heard learned corrnsel appearing for both sides and pemsed the rer:ord.

¶23

The claimants, who are the dependants of the deceased, have filed a claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation on account of the death of the deceased.

¶24

According to the case of the claimants, on 25.O1.20O5, while the deceased was travelling in a Maruti Alto Car, the offending vehicle, which is a lorry, came in opposite direction ancl dashed against the car, resulting in the deceased dying on the spot.

¶25

The manner in which the accident has taken place and the liability on the Insurance Company, are not disputed.

¶26

It was the claim before the Tribunal that the deceased was earning around Rs.20,00O/_ per month through cultivation and vegetable business. However, the Tribunal found that since no

¶27

documentary evidence was proved to show that the deceased owned any extent of land, the income of the deceased was taken at Rs. 15,000/- per annum notionally.

¶28

The fact remains that the deceased was a farmer. Though it is claimed that the deceased was earning Rs.2O,O00/- per month, by following the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ramachandr:,ppa a. Manageq Rogal Sundarann Alliancel, t}re income of the deceased can be considered as Rs.4,500/- per month notionally, for granting compensation.

¶29

On perusal of the records, the age of the deceased as on the date of accident was 6O years. Reiying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Co, Ltd, Vs. Pranag Sethiz, if 10% of his income is added towards future prospects, the monthiy income wouid come to Rs.4,950/- (Rs.a,500/- + llOok of 4,000)). As there are three dependants on the deceased, 1/3.a of his income is deducted towards personal expenditure as per the authority in Smt. Sorla Vartna Vs. Delhi Transport Corporations, and thus, the monthly contribution of the deceased to the claimants would be Rs.3,300/- (4,950 - (7 l3,a of 4,950)).

¶30

1 (2o1 l) l3 scc 236

¶31

2 zort 1o1 l7o (sc)

¶32

3 lzoosy o s.c.c. 12 1

¶33

n/.

¶34

I I

¶35

Then annual contribution comes to Rs.39,6O0/. As per Schedule II of the Act, if the said annual contribution arrived is multiplied with relevant multiplier i.e.,^,9, to the age of the deceasecl, the total amount comes to Rs.3,56,400/. The claimants are entitled for the said amount under the head of loss of dependency.

¶36

Further, relying on the ratio laid down in pranag Sethi,s case (2 supra), the claimants are granted Rs.30,O00/_ towards funeral expenses and loss of estate. Further, each claimant is granted Rs.40,0O0/- towards consortium.

¶37

Therefore, the ciaimants are eligible for the cornpensation as below

¶38

Sl.No. Name of the Compensation Compensation
Head awarded by awarded by this
the Tribunal Court
1 Loss of Rs.1,0O,00O/- Rs.3,56,4OOl- l
dependency
2 Funeral expenses Rs.2,O00/ -
Funeral expenses Rs.30,00O/-
i3 and Loss of Estate
4 Loss of Rs.5,OO0/- Rs.1,20,0OO/-
consortium
(Rs.40,0o0/- to
(for appellant
each claimant)
I No.1)
5 Total
Rs.1,O7,OOO/ - Rs.5,06,4OOl-

¶39

¶40

1 1. In the result, the Motor Accidents Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation from Rs. 1,07,000/- to Rs.5,O6,4OO/-.

¶41

(a) The awarded amount shall carry interest at 7 .5o/o p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.

¶42

(b) The respondents shall deposit the amount within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the^judgment. On such deposit, claimants are entitled to withdraw the entire

¶43

amount without furnishing the security.

¶44

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. No

¶45

order as to costs.

¶46

¶47

Sd/. P. CH. NAGABHUSH BA ASSISTANT REGI R \l

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1 . The chairman Motor Accident claims Tribunal-cum-vlll Additional District Judge, Nizamabad.

¶52

One CC to SRI P. RADHTVE REDDY, Advocate [OpUC]

¶53

One CC to SRI K. SUBBA RAO, Advocate [OpUC]

¶54

Two CD Copies

AS/karn

HIGH COURT

DATED:0410912024

JUDGMENT+DECREE

MACMA.No.150 of 2009

1 nE STAT €'
lt
iloo5 2 B [{0! 2[2{ -b
t c'J
.DESpA.Ir ,-'

¶62

MACMA IS PARTLY ALLOWED

¶63

fia

¶64

t³²⁵¹ l

¶65

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶66

WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FOUR

¶67

PRESENT

¶68

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶69

M.A.C.M.A.No: 150 of 2009

¶70

Between:

¶71

P. Gangamma, W/o P.lt/alla Reddy,

¶72

P. Niraja, D/o P.lvlalla Reddy,

¶73

P. I\4amatha, D/o P.Nralla Reddy,

¶74

...AppellanUClaimants

¶75

AND

¶76

1 B.Shekar, S/o Chandraiah

¶77

2 The New lndia Assurance Company Limited,^{rep. by its Divisional Manager,} Divisional office, Opp: Zilla Parishad Office, Subashnagar,^Nizamabad.

¶78

...Respondents

¶79

Appeal filed under Section 173 of M.V. Act,^{against the Judgmentand} Decree dated. 29-07 -2OOA^passed in Ivl.V.O.P.No.410 of^{2005 on the file of the} Court of the Chairman tr/otor Accident Claims^{Tribunal-cum-Vlll AdditionaiDistrict} Judge, Nizamabad.

¶80

This appeal coming on for hearing and upon^{perusing the grounds of appeal,} the.iudgment and Decree of the Lower Court and^the material^{papers in the case and} upon hearing the arguments of SRI P. RADHIVE^{REDDY,Advocate for the} Appellants and of SRI K. SUBBA RAO,^for the^Respondents.

¶81

¶82

This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

¶83

That the Motor Accident Civil lr/iscellaneous Appeal be and hereby is allowed in part by enhancing the compensation from Rs.'1,07,0001 to Rs.5,06,4001;

¶84

That the awarded amount shall carry tnterest at the rate of 7.5yo per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization;

¶85

That the respondents shall deposit the amount within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the Judgment;

¶86

That on such deposit, claimants are be and hereby entitled to withdraw the entire amount without furnishing the security;

¶87

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

¶88

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

¶89

//TRUE COPY//

¶90

Sd/- P. CH. NAGABHUSHAM ASSISTANT REGIS \g SECTION OFFICER

¶91

To, 1. The Chalrman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-VIll Additional District Judge, Nizamabad.

¶92

1. Two CD Copies

AS&an

HIGH COURT

DATED:0410912024

DEGREE

MACMA.No.150 of 2009

MACMA IS PARTLY ALLOWED

¶100

$"r

P.Gangamma and 2 Others v. B.Shekar and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Gangamma and 2 Others v. B.Shekar and Another

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

Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs Naresh Goud and Another

Singireddy Madhusudan Reddy, Vs Sri.Annadi Narasirnha Reddy

The Superintendent of Police, Nizamabad and 4 Others Vs Shobha, Nizamabad Dist and 2 Others

Jalla David Vs C.K.Kasim and Anr.

Bojja Nagaraju Vs Somavarapu Srihari and Another

Ayyawar Gangadhar Vs N.v.Santosh Reddy and Anr.