Nanu Ram Aliqs Chuhru Ram & otherJ , and in the authority vs Satinder Kaur (itt. Satwinder Kaur and other..s , fortified that

counset for the Appeilants : sri Mohan vinod - ;:::,fi:tents/Respondents Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Sri K'Aiay Kumar The Court delivered the following: Judgment _-.-_.--- THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA M.A.C.M.A.N o.3 460 of 2OO9 JUDGMENT: 1'his appcal is filed against the Order dated I2.O3.2009 in M.V.O.P,No.2 2l ctf 2OOa, passed by the learned Special Judge for trial ol ofle nces under SC/ST (pOA) Act _ cum V_Additional District :rncl Sessions ._ludge, Medak, at Sangarcdcil.. '2. 'llrc petirion uide M.y.O.p.No.22I of 2008 rvas fi)c6l [1. appella:-rts1peritioncrs claiming compcnsation of Rs.6,O0,0OO/_ lirr thc dearh of [he dece ased C.Anjaneyulu, u,ho diecl ir.r tl,re motor vehiclc accident occurred on 25.O2.2OOg. Tl.re trial Court goI exarnincd P.W. 1 on behalf of the appellants / pr,titioners ancl markcd Exs.Al to A8 on their behatf. R.w. r r.l.as examined or-r behall' o1' the respo.dc.ls trncl marked trx.B l to rJ4 or.r tlrcir behalf. Thc trial Court after considcring thc orat and docume n tar1, e vidcnce on re cord, grzrntcd comltr:nsation ol Rs.3,34,0O0/ iLlong rvith interest 1A, 7.5,,/o per annum Irom Lhe datc of petltion till realization. Aggrieved b-v the saicl Arr.ard, petitioners thercin preferred ,:he present appeal seeking Lo enhance the compensation amount granted by thc triai Court. .t '.'' 2

3. Parties hereinafter referred to as rcspondents, as arrayed before thc trial Court for the sakc of petitione rs and convenlence. The brief lacts of the case are that on 25-O2'2OO8 at about 4. 9:OO PM, the deceased along r't'ith his wife were proceeding on a Scooter bearing No.AP 13 A 6497, towards Ameenpur village ' Hou.ever.atShankarpallyTarRoadnearSu.agruhaMeadorn.s,a lorry bearing No.AP 12 T 6004, was parked on the road wilhout any indica[or. As it was night time, the deceased Anjaneyulu' could not see the stationed lorry and dashed to it' As a result' the deceased died on the spot and the pillion ridr:r was shif[ed to Gandhi HosPital The learned Counsel for the appellants/ petitioners mainly 5. contended that the trial CourL ought to have takcn the incomc of the deceased as Rs.7,500/ per monlh, as hc was self- employed and running a snack shop The multiplier was also u,ronglyconsideredbythetrialCourtandthcamoun|sgranted undervariousheadsarealsoverymeager.Therefore,requestcd theCourttoenhancethecompensationamountgrantedbythe trial Court. i t I I I I I i i ! i : i i I )

6. Perusal of the record shows that as per !lx.A7_ Postmortem cxamination report, the deceased was aged about 45 years. P.W.1 in her evidence stated that deceascd was doing snack business and earning Rs.1S,0O0/_ per month, but she has not aclducecl any evidence to prove the same. Therefore, in view ol thc decision ol the Hon,ble Apex Court in the case of Ramachandrappa Vs. Manage4 Rogal SundoroLm Alliance Insurance Compang Limited.,t considering agc and occupation of tl-re it-rj r:r.cl, this Courts h,cls that it is just ancl reasonatrle to considcr titc incomc of 1.1-re deceased as Rs.4,500 / per month and thus the annual income of the deccased would comes to Rs 54,0oO/ (Rs.a,5Oo/- X 12 = Rs.54,o0O/-).

7. As pcr tl're guidclir.res of the Hon,ble Apex Court in clictum ol' Srrrla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporcition,,z ,S |n" deceasecl u,.rs rnarried, I l4h <tf his income has to be deciucted lorvards his pcrsonal expcnscs, as there arc 5 dcpcndcnts. Thus, tl-re ar-rnual ir-rcome of the deceased afler deducting personal expenses u.ould comes to Rs.4O,5O0/ per annum (Rs.54,0OO - Rs. 13,500= Rs.ae,SOO/_) and the Hon,blc Apex Court irr thc clictum of National Insurance Compang Limited. (l0 t I) l.l scc l t6 (2009)(rSCt'tZl 4 Vs. ProLncLg Sethi3, held that thc future prospects of income ol the self-employed shall also be included in determination of the compensation. Thus, consi<lering the agc of the deccascd i'e ' 45 years, 25%o of the income i'e , Rs lO'1251-' has to be added towards fu[ure prospecLs and thus the amount rn'ould becomc Rs.50,625/- (Rs.40,50O/ + Rs'10,125l : Rs 50'625/-)' This surn if multiplied u'ith the multiplier 14 applicable to the age of the deceased i.e., 45 years, it would comc to Rs 7'O8'750/- (Rs.5O,625 x 14 : Rs.7,08,7501-l' Thus' petitioners are entitlcd to Rs.7,08,75O/ - under the hcad 'Loss of Dcpcndency''

8. Besides, appellants/ petitioners are also entitled for compensation uncler 'conventional heads' as presr:ribed in the dictum of Nationql Insurance Compang Linited Vs' Prandg Sethi, i.e., Rs.15,00O/- towarcls loss of Estatc and Rs 15'000/- to\ rards funeral charges and Rs 4O'0OO/ - to petitioner No- 1 towards spousal consortium Therefore' lhey are entitled for Rs.7O,O00/ - under the 'Conventional heads'' g.Further,theHon'bleSupremeCourt'byreiteratlngthe comprehensive interpretation of 'consortium' given in the authority of Magma General Insurance Comgtang Lirnited us' ' (2017) t6 scc 680 i l I 1 I I i I I I i ---- ) Nanu Ram Aliqs Chuhru Ram & otherJ , and in the authority betrveen llnited Ind.ia Insurance Compang Limited vs. Satinder Kaur (itt. Satwinder Kaur and other..s , fortified that the zrmounts for loss of consortium shall be arvarded to the children r,,ho losc the care and prolection U[ lh,.rr parents as 'parental co.sortium'.nd to the parents as, ,firiar consortium, for the loss o[ their grown_up children, to compcnsate their agony, love irnd affection, care and companionship o[ deceased children. Accordingly, it is just and reasonable to ar.ard Rs.40,00O/ each to pctitioners No.2 to 5 under ,parental Consortium'. 1O. Thereforc, petitior.rers/claimants are entitled for the .ompensi)t iol i1 rlrr. 16llorr lpg 1sp6*, 1 2 a Loss of dependcncr. Conven[ional heads l)arcntal Consortium (a. Rs.4O,0O0/ TOTAL Rs.7,O8,750/- Rs.70,O00/ - Rs. 1,60,O00/- Rs.9,38,75Ol-

11. in the result, thc present appeal is allou,ed by enhancing Lhe compensation amount from Rs.3,34,000/_ to Rs.9,3g,75O/_ I I ' izo r sl rs scc no '(2020)9S(C61.1 6 't, r\) (Rupees Nine Lakhs Thirty tright Thousand Seven Hundrcd and Fifty only) with interest at the ratc of 7 .5"h per annurn from the date of filing the petition till the date of rcalization Though, Respondents No.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation, respondent No.2/Insurance Company is directed to deposit thc entire amount n'ithin a period of one month from Lhe clate of reccipt of a copy of this Judgmen t. Petitioners No.4 and 5 are minors at the timc of filing thc petitioner in the year 2OO8. B]'this time, they might have attained the a€le of rrajonty Out of total compensation amount petitioncr Nos-2 to 5 / children arc entitled to Rs.1,OO,O0O/- each ar-rd the petitioner No.l/r.l,ife is entitled for the balance amount' On such deposit, all tlrc pctitioners are perrnitted 1o lt'ithdrau' thc said arnount along with interest accrued on it' Petitioncrs are also directed to pay the deficit Court fee on the enhanced amor-lnt. There shall be no order as to cosls' Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed . //TRUE COPY// SD/- A.SREENIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECThKF FICER To,

1. The Special Judge For Trail Of Offences Under SC/ST, (POA)ACT-CUM-V Addl.Dist and Sessions Judge, Medak, At: Sangareddy. (with records, if any)

2. One CC to Sri Mohan Vinod & Associates, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri K. Ajay Kumar Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies BSR/gh HIGH COURT DATED: 211O3t2025 JUDGMENT+DEcREE MACMA.No.3460 of 2009 q , ,., ,:) ,,'., .:,'.'.).. 1 r siP 2$6 :i:'- " '...- * -l;' -.t'-' -.',t-,^-'- . -:', "' - ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT GOSTS a4<)\ t 3208l IN THE HIGH GOURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF TMARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA MOTOR ACCI DENT CIVIL MI SCELLANEOU S APPEAL NO : 3460 0F 2009 Between: '1. Gaddameedi Nagamani, Wo- Late G -Anianeyulu' .Aged: 36yrs' Occ: errin".i, i/o.AmeeipurViliage, R C Puram, Medak District' 2. G. Ravi Kumar, S/o. Late G Anjaleyulu, Aged: 22yrs' Occ' Student' Rlo.nrneenpur Village, R.C.Puram, Medak District' 3. G. Sharath Kumar, S/o. Late G. A{a.n9V1!u, .Aged: 20yrs' Occ: Business' - 4. G. Sai Kumar, S/o. Late G' AnjaneAulu' . Aged:1Byrs' Occ:Student' " 5. G. Shailaia, D/o. Late G. Anjaneyulu, Aged:1,7 years'Minor' R/o-Ameenpur " Vtiri,j","Ht.Frir., rvrJri bi.tri"t iunder the'guardianship of her elder nio A*e"npur Village, R.C.Puram, Medak District' nlo.A*""npurVillage, R.C'Puram, Medak District' brottiei G.Ravi Kumar, Claimant No 2) (Appellant No. 4 is declared as Major Vide C'O Dt. 08-'10-2009 in MP No. 51 13/2009 ) "'Appellant(s)/Petitions AND 1 2 Goturi Chandraiah, S/o. Sayanna, Age: 38 yrs,Occ: Owner cum Driver of i#;'b;ffi; N5 hFizio'oo+. R/olNancriariH/s Khana Puri' chevella Mandal, R.R.District. lClCl Lombord Motgor lnsurance,, D No 3-6-365/4"/8' .Ground i".'i.i,'opp -sli"i;, Liberty circle, Himayathnagar' Hvderabad' Floor' Sama Appeal filed under section 173 of M V'ACT ag-ainst order dated 12_O3-2OO} in cjlF.r'lo.izr';i'iob8;;-th" fire of the court of the The special Judoe For Trait Of Otrence"s UnO"i SClSf, (POA)ACT-CUM-V Addl'Dist and S.iilon" Judge, Medak, At: Sangareddy' ...ResPondents/ResPondents ? This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, .. the Judgment and Decree of the Tribunir and ihe materiar-paperi in the ca# and upon hearing the arguments of sri Mohan Vinod & Associates, Advocate for the Appellant and of Sri K.Ajay Kumar,Advocate for the Respondent No.2 This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

1. That the lt/otor Accident civir Miscelaneous Appear be and hereby is allowed by enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.3,34,0001 to Rs 9 38,7501 (Rupees Nine Lakhs Thirty Eight rhousand seven Hundred and Fifty only) with interest at the rate of 7.so/o per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of realization;

2. That the Respondents No.l and 2 are joinfly and severally liable to pay compensation, respondent No.2/lnsurance Company is directed to deposit the entire amount wrthin a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment;

3. That the Petitioners No.4 and 5 are minors at the time of firing the petitioner in the year 2008. By this time, they might have attained the age of majority. Out of total compensation amount petitioner Nos.2 to S/children are entifled to Rs.1,00,000/- each and the petitioner No.1/wife is entitled for the balance amount;

4. That on such deposit, a[ the petitioners are permitted to withdraw the said amount along with interest accrued on it;

5. That the Petitioners are arso directed to pay the deficit court fee on the enhanced amount;

6. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. //TRUE COPY// SD/- A.SREENIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECffiorr,"=* To,

1. The Special Judge For Trail Of Offences Under SC/ST, (POA)ACT_CUM_V 2. Two CD Copies Addl.Dist and Sessions Judge, Medak, At: Sangareddy. BSR HIGH COURT DATED: 2110312025 DECREE MACMA.No.3460 of 2009 ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS