The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI M.Satish Reddy The Court made the following: ORDER ..Respondents THI} HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASI{AR REDDY No.269 20L9 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensa:ion awarded by the Motor Accident claims Tribunal- cum-lX A,lditional chief Judge, city civil court, Hyderabad, in M.V.O.P.No.B39 of 2014, dated 04.10.2018. By the said order, the Tribunal irwarded a total compensation of Rs.4,00,0oo/- for the death of Smt. I(. Mallamma.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 07.07.2008 at about

4.45 p.m., the deceased, Smt. K. Matlamma, was selling vegetables near Ganrlhi statue, Narsappaguda Village and at that time, a Tata sumo bearing No.AP-28-AB-1557. which was being driven in a rash and negligent manner and at high speed, dashed against her and two other women standing by the roadside. Due to which, the deceased sust.ained grievous injuries and succumbed to death on the way lo the hospital at Shadnagar. A case in crime No.148 of 2OO8 was, registered by the Kothur Police against the driver of the offending vehicle. The appellant Iiled the aforesaid o.P. against respondent Nos. 1 and i.e., owner of the crime vehicle and the Insuranc,: company, claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,o00/-. Before tL.e Tribunal, the respondent No. 1 remained ex parte and the respcndent No.2-insurance company filed counter affidavit and ;l 2 contested the o.P. The Tribunal, after full-fledged enquiry, while holding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Tata Sumo, awarded compensation of Rs.4,0O,000/- with interest at 9o/o per annum' Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation, the appellants/claimants preferred the present aPPeal- The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the 3. deceased was aged about 45 yea4s, hale and healthy' and was earning Rs.12,000/- per month as a vegetable vendor' and that her entireearningswerebeingutilisedforthemaintenanceofthe family consisting of her husband and three sons' It is contended that the Tribunal erred in fixing the income of the deceased at Rs.3O,O00/- per annum, though PW'1 had clearly deposed about theearningsofthedeceasedandnorebuttalevidencewasadduced bythelnsuranceCompany.ItissubmittedthattheTribunalfailed to take note of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shcrikh Scdik Sho;ikh Ralique a' Reliance General Insurance Compang Ltdl., wherein it was held that the income of an unskilled worker for the year 2OO4 shall be Rs.4,500/- per month with an increment of Rs'SOO/- per month for each successive year. Taking the accident year herein as 2008' the learned counsel submits that the income ought to have been fixed I 2025 tNSc 673 .o,v 3 at Rs.(i,500/- per month. It is further submitted that the Tribunal failed to award future prospects as mandated in Nationo,l fnsurctnee Co. Ltd.. a. Pranag Sethl2 and also granted meagre amour ts under the conventional heads and ultimately, prayed to enhan,:e the compensation.

4. ()n the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the Insurance Company supported the impugned award of the Tribunal and contended that the claim of Rs.I2,OOOl- per month waS ricrt supported by any documentary evidence and therefore the Tribunal rightly adopted notional income. It is further contended. that ttre compensation awarded is just and reasonable and does not warrant interference.

5. 'l'his court has considered the submissions of both sides and perusec the material available on record. The deceased was 45 years ,tld at the time of the accident. The Tribunal adopted a notional annual income of Rs.30,0OO/-, which is contrary to the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme court in shaikh sadflc sha,ikh Rafique's case (supra). As per the said decision, the income of Rs.4,Soo/- fixed for the year 2oo4 is required to be increased by Rs.SOO/- per month fc every subsequent year. Applyirrg the said formula for the accident year 200g, the income of the deceased ought to have been fixed at Rs.6,50O/- per month. ,(2ot7l l? sec oeo 4

6. As held by the Honble Supreme Court in Pranag Sethi's case (supra), even self-employed persons are entitled to addition towards future prospects. Since the deceased was 45 years of age, 25oh hras to be added towards future prospects. '['hus, the monthly income would come to Rs.8,125/-. There are four dependants and therefore 1/4ttr has to be deducted towards personal and living expenses. The monthly contribution would thus be Rs.6,O93/- and the annual contribution comes to Rs.73,116/-. The appropriate multiplier for the age group of the deceased, as held in Sarla Verma u. Delhi Transport Corporations, is '14'. Applying the said multiplier, the loss of dependency comes to Rs.1O,23,624/-. In addition to the above, the claimants are entitled to the amounts under the conventional heads. The 1st appellant/husband is entitled to Rs.4O,O00/- towards loss of consortium. As per the decision in Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd.. Vs. Nanu Ro,rrt Alias Chuhru Ranna" the appellants 2 to 4, being the sons of the deceased, are entitled to filial consortium of Rs.40,0O0/- each. They are further entitled to Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs. 15,000/- towards loss of estate. Thus, the total compensation payable to the appellants/claimants is tabulated as under: 3(2009) 6 SCC 121 42ot8 L"S:. (SC) e04 5 Awarded by Tribunal Rs.2,80,000 Rs.65,000 Rs.40,000 Rs.15,OOO sl. No i 2 3

6. Name of Head Loss ofdependency Loss of love and affec:ion Spousal consortium Filial consortium Funeral expenses Loss of estate TOTAL Rs.4,OO,OOO Awarded by this Court Rs.10,23,624 Rs.4O,OOO Rs.1,20,000 Rs.15,000 Rs.15,000 Rs.12,14,OOO (Rounded off) The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 7 .Soh per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. The liability fastened by the Tr.bunal on respondents t and 2 jointly and severally is based on l.he ittsurance policy and is accordingly confirmed. In -he result, the appeal is allowed by enhancing the 7. compensation from Rs.4,00,000/- to Rs.12,14,OOOl-. The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at 7.5o/o per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. The rest of the terms and conditions imposed by the Tribunal shall remain unaltered No order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY/ . M JAWAHAR REDDY STANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Cum-lx Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Courts at Hyderabad. (with records if any)

2. One CC to SRl. V.Atchuta Ram, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC tD SRl.M.Satish Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD OoPies rA/psr P"Aa' . :" ' t i,j ,. J..- i::l t 5 $'iiii' ?ult l"; HIGH COURT DATED:17 11112025 JUDGMENT MACMA.No'269 of 2019 M.A.C.M.A IS ALLOWED' \&\aA,t IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD MONDAY THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND IWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V, BHASKAR REDDY MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 269 OF 2019 Between:

1. Katna Narayana, S/o. Pentaiah, Aged about 59 years, Occ Nil 2. Katna Kumar, S/o. Narayana, Aged 34 years, Occ Private Employee. 3. Katna Srisailam, S/o. Narayana, Aged 30 years, Occ Private Employee. 4. Katna Srinivas, S/o. Narayana, aged 28 years, Occ Private Employee, All Rl/o. H.No. 16-1241N2, New Nallkunta, Hyderabad ...Claimants Appellants AND

1. Mr. K. Srinivas, S/o. Ananthaiah, Aged Major, Occ Business, R/o. H.No.1- 28-27, Bapuji Nagar, Bowinpally, Secunderabad-500001.

2. United lndia lnsurance Company Limited, Rep by its Regional Manage, TP Claims Hub, 1st floor, Posinate Bhavan Church Building Ramkote, Hyderabad. ...Respondents Appeal u/sec. 173 of motor vehicles act against the order and decree made in MVOP No.839 of 2014 dated 0411012018 on the file of the Court of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Cum-lX Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Courts at Hyderabad. ORDER: 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 and upon hearing the arguments of Sri V.Atchuta Ram, Advocate for the Appellant and of Sri M.Satish Reddy, Advocate for the Respondent. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

1. That the MACMA be and hereby is Allowed by enhancing the compensation from Rs.4,00,0001 to Rs. 1 2,14,0001;

2. That the enhanced compensation shall carry interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit;

3. That the rest of the terms and conditions imposed by the Tribunal shall remain unaltered:

4. That lhere shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. //TRUE COPY// SD/. M JAWAHAR REDDY REGISTRAR AS CTION OFFICER To,

1. Th() Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Cum-lX Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil CoJrts at Hyderabad. (with records if any)

2. Twc CD Copies JA\PSL PYra HIGH COUttT DATED:17 t1112025 DECREE MACMA.No 269 of 2019 IHE S t 50 :{l E .J t * ) t M.A.C.M.A I]] ALLOWED P$4. tq,t v\21,