The High Court · 2025

Counsel forthe Appellants: Sri Jagathpal Reddy Kasi Reddy Counsel forthe Respondents 1 and 3: None Appeared Counsel for the Respondent No. 2: Sri Kota Subba Rao The Court delivened the following: JUDGMENT I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT ITYDERABAI} THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BTIASKAR REDDY M.A.C.M.A.No.434 of 2O 19 DATE: O1.L2.2O25 Between: Fareeda Begum and four others AND .....Appellants Mohd. Ferz Pasha and two others JUDGMENT: .R.espondents This appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is filed by the appellants-claimants, challenging the order and decree dated 09-01-2019 passed in M.V.O.P.No.22L3 of 2O16 by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Chief Judge, City Civil Court, [{yderabad (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribur"l"), whereby the Tribunal awarded a total corryrensation of Rs.1I,00,600/- along rvith interest at 7.57o per annum in favour of the appellants-claimants i.e., wife, children and parents, as against the claim of Rs.2O,O0,0OO/- for the death of the deceased in a rnotor vehicle accident. 2

2. Tlre brief facts of the case are that on 06.0z.2o16 at about 9:oo p.rn-, the deceased, shaik waseem Akram (aged 27 years), was driving his auto (TATA-Ace) bearing registration No.Ap-29- cB-4o19, from Hyderabad towards Kaltakal village of Toopran Mandal and when ttrey reached the village limits of Kallakal on National Highway No.44, :r goods-carriage van (DCM) bearing registration No. Ap-lo-w- L976, t,eing driven by its driver suddenly turned right to take a u- turn in front of Janatha Hoter, without giving any signal or taking caution, and collided with the auto. As a result of the collision, the decease:d lost control of his auto and sustained fatat injuries. Immediately the deceased was shifted to Gandhi Hospital for treatmt:nt but succumbed to injuries the same night. The police registered a case vide crime No. L7g of 2016 at Toopran police station under section 304-A lpc against the driver of the DCM van. stating that prior to tlle accident the deceased was hale and healthy eaminl; a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month, the appellants-craimants i.e., wi[e, two minor children (son and daughter), and parents of the deceased filed the aforesaid claim petition before the Tribunal, seekinl3 compensation of Rs.2o,oo,ooo/- on account of the death of the der:eased.

3. IJefore the Tribunal, responde.t Nos.l and 3 i.e., owner and driver of crime vehicle remained ex parte. Respondent No.2- 3 insruance company filed a counter denying the averments of the claim petition and prayed to dismiss the claim petition.

4. After considering the oral arrd documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of DCM van and awarded compensation of Rs.11,OO,6O0/- with interest at

7.SYo per annum from the date of petition till realization. Challenging the same, the appellants-claimants filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that compensation granted by the Tribunal is meager and as per the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in No;tional Insurqnce Compang Limited. os. Ptrcrnorg Sethi and. othersr, the appellants are also entitled to Rs.84,0OO/- (Rs.70,00O/- + loo/o enhancement for every three years) under conventional heads.

6. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2-insurance company submit that the ,would compensation has been rightly granted by the Tlibunal and the same need not be enhanced. L 2017 Ac,J 2700 4

7. There is no dispute with regard to the linding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of respondr:nt No.3 i.e., the driver of the crime vehicle and respondent Nos.l and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the appc:llants-claimants.

8. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal, while accepting the age of the deceased (22 years), fixed income at Rs.4,5OO/- per month in absence of documentary proof, and af:er considering 4Oo/o addition for future prospects and deducting one-fourth for personal living expenses, rightly awarded loss of dependency of Rs.10,20,600|-. As regards compensation under conventional heads is concerned, it is apt to refer to the decisiorr of the l{onble Apex Court in Pranag Sethi's case (l supr4, wherefur it was held as follows:- "Reasonable figures on conuentional heo-d-s, namelg, loss o/ estate, Ioss o/ consortium and funeral expenses should be Rs. 15,OOO/-, Rs.aO,OOO/- and Rs.LS,OOO/- respectiuelg. The aforesaid amounts should. be enhanced at the rate of loo/o in euery three gears.' Taking into consideration the aforemenrioned decision of the Hontle Apex c)ourt, this court is inclined to grant an amount of Rs.84,oo0/- under the conventional heads to the appellants. Further, the amount granted by the Tribunal at Rs.15,ooo/- towards transportation and Rs.15,0oo/- towards loss of love are enhancecl to Rs.2o,ooo/- each. \r !q!! j_r!:F+4+.e,,lr''!rpryrr :9: .'1r.,.r | ,t.,. :', ;!-:' 't i;'-;:-:''''"r'1 \i,,.nh, i,,i ;, l j i 't' i ,,. -rl" ' ,,ti' .a 5 Thus, the appellants are entitled for total compensation of (Rs.10,20,6001-. + Rs.84,0OO/- + Rs.2Q,OOO /- + Rs.2O,OOO/-) Rs.1l ,44,600f -, rounding offto Rs. LL,4S,OOO/-.

9. In the result, this appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award passed by the Tribunal is modi{ied by enhancing the compensation from Rs.11,00,6O0/- to Rs.l 1,4S,0OO/ -.The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at 7.5o/o per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. Ttre 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. Sd/. M. JAWAHAR REDDY REGISTRAR ,,TRUE COPY// N OFFICER To,

1. The Chairman, lvlotor Vehicle Act Tribunal€um-Chief Judge, City Civil Courts at Hyderabad.

2. One CC to Sri Jagathpal Reddy Kasi Reddy, Advocate [oPUCI 3. One CC to Sri Kota Subba Rao, Mvocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies KVR Y{- F ATE o,,c Aq f, tl t\\t N& c.. LJ' ( '+.'i t, '. l'' a HIGH COURT CVBR, J DATED: 01 11212025 JUDGMENI+DECREE MACMA.No.434 of 2019 PARTLY ALLOWED WITHOUT COSTS G ,e 8r. IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V, BHASKAR REDDY LM 7m

1. Fareeda Begum, Wo late Shaik Waseem Akram, Aged 27 years' Occ' Household,

2. Master Shaik Shaha Nawaz, S/o late Shaik Waseem Akram, Aged 6 yearc' Occ,Nil,

3. Baby Sklra Konain, D/o late Shaik Waseem Akram, Aged 5 yearst Occ, Nil, 4. Meher Unnisa, Wo Shaik Ahmed, Aged 46 years, Occ, household, 5. Shaik Ahnred, S/o late Shaik Mahboob, Aged 53 years, Occ, Nil, Petitioners l.lo.2 and 3 being minors, Represented thror4h her natural And next best friend, the Petitioner No. 1) All are residents of H.No.19-2- 18Ot 211, Mochi Colony, near lTl, PNRColony' 064, Presently resideht of H.No. 3$'12451c, -s00 020.) TI

1. MoM. Feroz Pasha, S/o Mohd. Ahmed Pasha, Aged Major, Occ, Business' ' nyo ft.No.tC-1-1233i218i, Natraj Nagar, Jhirra Karwan, Secunderabad'

2. TATA AIG General lnsurance Company Ltd, Represented by Manager, office at 4th floor, Block-A, My Home Tycoon' Begumpet, Hyderabad. its Divtsional

3. B.Rama Anjani, S/o B.Sunkanna, \ge! 27. Vehicle, RUo H.No. 13-6-450l44l8lF' Alluri Hyderabad. years, Occ, Driver of the crime Sitaranra Raiu Nagar, tGnmn, ...RESFONDENTS'RESFONDENTS AppealfiledunderSectionlT3ofMotorVehiclesActagainstthe .tudgme;[ and Decree passed in O.P.No. 2213 ot 2016, dated 09.01 .2019 on the file;f the Court of the Chairman, Motor Vehicle Act Tribunal-Cum-Chief Judge' City Civil Courts at HYderabad. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the. grounds of appeal, the Jr.rdgment and Decree of the court below and the material papers in the case and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Jagathpal Reddy Kasi Reddy, Advocate for the, appellants and Sri Kota Subba Rao, Advocate for the Respondent No. 12 and none appeared for Respondent Nos. 1 and 3 either in person or by Advocate. This Court doth OrCer and Decree as follows:

1. That the Motor Accident CiMl Miscellaneous Appeal be and hereby is partly allowed, enlrancing the compensation from Rs. 1 1,00,600 to Rs 1 1 ,45,000/-; 2. That the enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at 7.5o/o per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization;

3. That the rest of the terms and conditions imposed by the Tribunal shall remain unalteres;

4. That save €rs aforesaid, the decree of the Tribunal shall stand confirmed in all other aspecfs; and

5. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. Sd. M. JAWAHAR REDDY ANT REGISTRAR CTION OFFICER To,

1. The Chairman, Motor Vehicle Act Tribunal4um-Chief Judge, City Civil Courts at Hyderabad. 2. Two CD Copies KVR HIGH COURT CVBR, J DATED: 0111212025 DECREE MACMA.No,434 of 2019 PARTLY ALLOWED WITHOUT COSTS L( o{a kr.