The High Court · 2025

THE HOI\IC' I]RABLE SMT. JUSTICE M'G'PRIYADARSiINI M.A.C.M.A. No.26O 7 oF 2014 JUDGMENT Aggrt: v r passed llY ,he by the Award and Decree dated 2 ''(32014 r;arned Motor Vehicle Accidents ()1ain-rs' Tribunal ipal District Judge, at Adilabad (for sh rrt 'the - cum -- F'rtr Tribunat'). jn l[.V.O'P No'431 of 2O08 the respolld']n ' No 2/ Insurancc(j-(l.:IpanyinthesaidO.P.preferred.hepresent Appeal io si( 1- :;rde the Award of the learned Tribunal

2. For t:rr sake o1 convenience' the parties her(rlnal'ter be referrecl as [l - \'were arrayed before the learned Tri'urtat' 3 The 'tr, I facts of the case are that initLallv 166 (1) (c) cf I)e [itlone rs tL e Motor have liled zr t-retition under Section Vehicles ,\:t 1988 r/w Rule 455 of the A.F'. Mo 'or Vchicle of Rs.19,00,000/- along Rules, lot'(l lsiming compcnsal ion with inte't'rs ,2, 187o per annum against the respr)l-I'lenls on accourlr ()l ].e death of Mulukalla Vishal Kumar' (ht 'reinafter referreci ls " he deceasedJ in a motor vehicle :rccic'ent that ' The occurred rt the intervening night of 12 I l:\-O7 petitiorre: f : r; 1 and 2 are the parents of t1-re rle ce rsed and petitionel N r il is the unmarried sister of the deceas< d' "lO(J8 / / :: i t xI T 2 MGP,] MACMA.No.2607 of 2014

4. It is stated by the petitioners that on the intervening night ot 12113-07-2OO8 at about O1.3O hours after completion of his work, the deceased along with his friend G.Venkata Prasad were proceeding towards Mehdipatnam on motorcycle bearing registration No.AP 28 CA 5286 and when they reached near Telecomnagar, near Urdu University, all of sudden one Tempo bearing registration No.AP 23 W0195 came in a opposite direction driven by its driver in rash and negligent ^urrr high speed and hit the motorcycle of the deceased, due to which , { the deceased and his friend fell down and received grievous injuries and whereas, the deceased died on the spot.

5. A case in Crime No. 181 of 2OO8 of Raidurgudam (Cyberabad) Police Station was registered under Section 3O4-A of IPC and hled charge sheet against the driver of Tempo bearing registration No.AP 23 WO195.

6. It is stated by the petitioners that prior to the accident, the deceased was hale and healthy, aged 23 years and used to work as Mechanical Supervisor in L & T Company and used to earn an amount of Rs.15,OOO/- per month. Due to sudden death of the deceased, the petitioners lost their bread winner and were put to mental shock and became destitute. Hence, the \ p&itioners frled claim petition seeking compensation against the @',.r-ry 3 fuIGP,I Ntt at. t & 26A7a12014 Respondcnt N r ;.1 & 2, who are owner and instrrer <'f ;ubject Tempo bcari;rg egistration No.AP-23-W0195. 7 . Responc I Itt No.1 i.e., owner of the Tempo beal irrg No AP 23-WO1!)rt le n r.ined ex-porte before the learned 'Tribun rl. R,:spctt l':r-rt No.2, who is the insurer of tht- crimc "ehicle, 8. Illed his c()r n r ()r denying the averments made in r ht claim petition :n,;. u I ng, age, avocation, income of the 1e';eased, manner of acr i,lent, rash and negligent driving 'lf thc cl:iver of the offenclin g ,ehicle and contended that the corn re rsalion claimed is er:r i r;s and exorbitant and hence prayecl t:) 'iismiss the claim p: .i irn against it. Bzrse,l r r the pleadings made by both the pa rtr es, the g . leamed 'lr trL- al framed the following issues for c'ln lucling trial:- L 2 . i4 t ether the deceosed died in the o:lidt;nt oL r rured on 12.O7.2O08 due to the ras:lt and vt , rligent driuing of the Temp beaing Nct. AP-.)3-

1..t195? 1l t i ether the claimants are en.title d r-v rnpensation as claimed in th.e petitiort, tf so to r,t t ot extent and against u.thom?

3. i" Luhat reliel? 4 MGPJ MACMA No 2507 oJ 2014

10. Before the learned Tribunal, on behalf of the petitioners, PWsl & 2 were examined and Exs.Al to A10 were marked. On behalf of Respondent/Insurance Company no oral or documentary evidence was adduced.

11. After considering the oral and documentary evidence on behalf of both the sides, the learned Tribunal partly-allowed the claim petition by awarding compensation of Rs. 16,85,O00/- along with interest @ 7 .5o/o per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit payable by both the respondent Nos.l & 2 jointly and severally. Aggrieved by the said finding, the present Appeal is hled by the Insurance Company, who is arrayed as respondent No.2 in the O.P.

72. Heard arguments submitted by Sri Kondadi Ajay Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for appellant/ Insurance Company as well as Sri S.Surender Reddy, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3/claimants. Perused the record.

13. The only contention raised by the learned counsel for appellant/Insurance Company is that respondents-claimants are majors and not dependants of the deceased and they are not entitled for any compensation; the learned Tribunal has erred in taking income of the deceased as Rs.15,O00/- per month, as no \ i r,xs-.,*==*..FO ! l , ; I I i I I I I , I i I i l i i ! I I i I I I I 5 M6P,] r.1\aM \ No-2607 0l 2014 incomt: pr,rc . u,as filed; hence, prayed to a11ow tfLc Appeal by setting asirle ;re judgment passed by the learned Tritrultal'

14. (ln e other hand, learned .otrns':l for the I respon <ie,r :s ' :rlaimants argued that the learnt:d '[ri bu nal after all the aspects, rightly awat-ded re asonable for which interference of this ( )ourt is considerirr:, compensi( ir t unwarrar.t er

15. No\l' t L: point that emerges for determinatior: i:, l\,'lrcther the Award passed by th.e le'ctnt'td L,t, requires interference of this Court? T'ttot Lt

16. Pql{! : A perusal of the record disclost:s tilt t lletitioner No. 1 l>errr11 re wife of the deceased reiterateci the r;c nten ts of the c air-r r'. l ition and deposed about the mELr 11€ r ol the acclderLt . ,\: .)W.1 is not an eyewitness to the accid :n,, she got examincc. P / '.2, who is an eye witness to thr: accid e nt PW2 deposcci atr r t the manner of the accident. Aparl lro rlr relying upon i)-re ('v rlence of PW.2, the petitioner filed docrtrle:lts under Exs.A I t,) I ,1. Ex.A1 is the F.I.R, Ex.A.2 is rhe :lrar ge sheet, which cl,:irr , discloses that the accident occLtrretl 1ue to rash and negl Lg3: r . driving of the Tempo. Considering lhe r'rame, the learnecl Iri petitionc - s r'-Lnal has answered issue No. 1 in la zor tr of the r rting that the accident occurred due t o rash and \ 6 MGP,] MACMA.No 2607 ol2014 negligent driving of the Tempo bearing No.Ap-23-W0195. Apart from Exs.A I and, A2, the petitioner has also relied upon Ex.A3/inquest report, Ex.A4/PME report, which discloses that deceased died in the accident. Ex.AS is the degree certihcate, Ex.A6 is the SCC certihcate and Ex.A7 is the certi{ied copy of intermediate certificate of the deceased. These documents disclose the educational qualifications of the deceased. The petitioners relied upon trx.A9 Salary Certificate issued try the employer of the deceased to establish that the deceased was working as Mechanical Supervisor in L & T Company and earning an amount of Rs. 15,OOO/- per month. 17 . Now coming to the compensation amount, as per the petitioners the deceased used to earn an amount of Rs.15,OOO/- per month, taking the same into consideration and also considering the deceased is a Bachelor, the learned Tribunal has deducted 5O7o from the income of the deceased towards personal expenses, hence, the annual income of the deceased after deducting personal expenses wiil be Rs.90,OOO/- (Rs.7,5O0/- x 12 months). As per the date of birth certificate, the deceased was aged around 24 years and suitabie multiplier is '18'as per the decision of the Apex Court in Sarla Varma v. \ \ I I t I I ' i i i i i l I ,.:l::;-.-.iiF-:.1.flr/ .|!-, ':/ To 1 2 J 4 1 MGP) IA aMA \!a 26A7 aJ 2014 Delhi Trarrs port Corporation and anotherl. lhus, the petittont r s i r:: entitled for an amount of Rs.1tr,! O,000/- (Rs.9O,{)0( r r 18) towards loss of dependenr:1'. llre learned Tribuna l z s rlso awarded Rs.25,0OO/ - towards kr;s o : estate, Rs.25,000 / I , ru,ards loss of love and affection, R ; . I 0,000 / lowards [r- :r,:ral expenses and Rs.5,O0O,/ tou,ards lransport a t o r charges and in all the petitioners rn r:re rrwarded Rs.16,8:;,(,()i: , .. Thus, this Court feels that the iearneC 'i'ribr,rnal has a\r'z.t l c il I just and reasonable amount iu d hcnce intcrfcrcr.rr c raising r:e:t:r : i lhis Court is unwarranted. Floutverr. except . pleas in the grounds of appeal, th: insurance Companl ba not produced any material to substar riz te their contenti,rn s. I r-r such circumstances, this Oourt is of the considerec ( I ,inion that the learned Tribunal h rs rightly awardcd thc cmpensation amount, for which inter f'e 'encr: of this Co :rt i s . trq,arranted. Hence, the Appeal is devoi,l c,f me,rits and liabil' to r : dismissed.

18. In r[ < r . i;ult, the Appeal is dismissed without :c st,; Misc:lk eous petitions pending, if any, shall stanrl ,:1or;cd Sd/. A.SREENIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR sECrroN oFFrc ER //TRUE COPY// ,,\ \ \\\\r 1 J The Chairrran ',,4otor Accident Claims TribunalVum- Prinr:it;al District Jud at Adilabad (\ i rth Records if any) One CC to SiF I KONDADI AJAY KUMAR, Advocate [OPU(]l One CC to SR lS SURENDER REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copie ; 0t.- ge, I HIGH COUR'I' DATED:07/031/ ?025 1x {ilit s6 / ,-i t ,." ii) \ '*1 .." \1 - ,\ ..il \ ,/ JUDGMENT MACMA.N o|2t'i07 of 201 4 i i I : I i I I l i l , i I DISMISSING I-HE MACMA WITHOUT CCISTS t A ') (- h 2.) € IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF IVIARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 2607 OF 2014 Between: Reliance General lnsurance Company Limitted, rep by its Manager O/o 6-4-8, 1st Floor, Vijetha Sanjeevini Apartments' Opp.Gandhi Hospital, Musheerabd, Hyderabad. ...APPELLANT/2.d RESPONDENT AND 1 Mulukalla Anasuya, Wo. Thirupathi Reddy, aged 4S-years, Occ: Housewife R/o. Shankarapui Village, Kotapalli Mandal, Adilabad District' Mulukalla Thirupathi Reddy, S/o. Raji Reddy, Pgeg pq ve91s, Occ: Govt iJrin"-, nyo. s-fiankarapur vitlage, Kotlpalli Mandal' Adilabad District' MulukallaSravatni,Dio.ThirupathiReddy,aged23years,Occ:StudentR/o' Shankarapur Village, Kotapalli Mandal, Adilabad District' RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS 4 Mohd Smiullah, S/o. Mohd Zainulabuddin owner of Crime Vehicle Tempo il;'ring N". AP'ZS W 0teS R/o. H.No.4-'144, Gokulnagar, Patancheru, Medak District. ...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT No'1 . Appeal filed under section 173 of Motor vehicles Act., against the award and decree, made in MVOP No.431 0f 2008 dated. 21-03-2014 0n the file of the chairman, Motor Accident claims Tribunal-cum- Principal Distrlct Judge, at Adilabad. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal' the Judgment and Decree of the court below and the material papers in the MVOP anduponhearingtheargumentsofSRl.KAJAYKUMAR,Advocateforthe . i,;:1 / appellant and of Stl I ISURENDER REDDY, Counsel for the Resp< ndents 1 to 3 and None Appeare(l 'o fhe Respondent No.4. This Court Doth O"de and Decree as follows:

1. That tlrr: 4otor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal tre and hereby is disnrisser. and

2. That tlrr:r s;hall be no order as to costs in this appeal. Sd/- A.SREEN|'/ASA REDDY A SI TANT REGISTRAR $ //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To

1. The Chairman I lrrtor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- Principill t)istrict Judge, at Adilabad. 2. Two CD Cop es Qa- HIGH COUR''I' DATED:07l0itlZO25 DECREE MACMA.N o,2ti07 of 2014 DISMISSINCi THE MACMA WITHOUT CCJSTS z.\ ,( lt) QA I l*-- t t1 ffi\,;