The High Court · 2025

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA M.A.C.M.A .No. 1 783 of 2OO9 JUDGMENT: This appeal is fiied against the Order dated 26' 1 1'20O8 in M.V.O.P.No.1O09 of 2006 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (District Judge) at Khammam'

2. The appellant/ petitioner filed M'V'O'I''No' 10O9 of 2006' claiming compensation of Rs 6,O0,00O/- for the death of the deceased, Terala Kalavathi in the road traffic accident occurred on 13.2.2OO4

3. The tribunal considering the oral and documentary evidence granted Rs. 1 ,49,000 / - with interest @ 7 5o/o per annum from the date of petition to till the date of deposit'

4. The learned Counsei for the appellant/ pe titioner contended that the tribunal erred in taking meager amount toward'Stheincomeofthedeceasedeventhoughdeceasedwas earning more than Rs.S,OOO/ - per month by doing Kirana Business. The tribunal ought to have seen that the Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of judgments held that the minimum income of the house wife should be taken @ Rs.3OOO/- per month and in the instant case, the deceased \ t I i ; ; I i ,' i I 2 apart from being a house wife was running Kirana business. The tribunal granted lesser compensation under the head of non-pecuniary damages which is quitc contrary to the land mark judgment of Apex Court in Susamma Thomas case reported in 1994 (1) ALT page 1 SC. Therefore, requested the Court to modify the award of the trial Court.

5. The deceased at the time of death being a housewife was running kirana business and was earning more than Rs.SOOO/_, but the Tribunal taken her income as Rs.1250/_ per month. No oral and documentary evidence was adduced regarding her income. As per the judgment passed in Lata wadhwa vs.State of Biharr,in which it is stated that .But euen in the absence of such datas and taking into consideration, the multifarious seruices rendered by the houseu.tiues for managtng the entire familg, euen on a modest estimation, stLould. be Rs.3OOO/- per month and Ri.36,OOO/ - per arTnum. This tuould_ applA to aII those Lutusewiues betuleen the age group of 34 to 59 and as such u.tho tuere actiue in life. Therefore, this court rrnds it reasonabre to take her income as Rs.3,000/- per month. ' lzootl s scc reu \ \ f 3 As per the guidelines of the Honlcle Apex Court in dictum 6. ol Sarld vefia Vs' Delhi Ttanspott Co'Poration'2 if the deceased was married' 1/3ft of her income has to be deducted towards personal expenses' Thus' the annual income of the deceased after deducting personal expenses comes to Rs.24,O00/- per annum and the Hon'lole Apex Court in the dictum of Nationoll Ltsurance Compang Limited Vs' Pranag Sethf , held that the future prospects of income of the self- employed deceased shall also be included in determination of the compensation' Thus'' considering the age of the deceased' 10% of the income has to be added towards future prospects and thus the amount would become Rs'26'4O0/- This sum if the multiplier applicable to the age of the multiPiied with it would come to Rs 2'9O'4OO/-' Thus' the deceased i.e.11, appellants / Petitloners are entitled to Rs'2,9O,4OO/- under the head 'Loss of DePendencY' 7 . Besides, the aPPellant is also entitled for comPensatton S prescribed in the dictum of under'conventional heads' National Insurqnce cottq'oln1 Limited Vs' Pranog Seth| \'e'' Rs.15,OOO/- towards Ioss of Estate and Rs 15'O0O/- towards funeral charges ' (loo9) 6 scc l2l ' (20I 7) 16 scc 680 I 4

8. Further, the Hon,ble Supreme Court, by reiterating the comprehensive .interpretation of .consortium, given in the authority of Magrna General Insurq.nce Contpang Limited. us. N1rnu Rann Atias Chuhru Ram & otherd , and in the authority between united India Insurornce Compang Limited. us. Satinder Kaur @ Satralinder Kaur and other;d , fortihed that the amounts for loss of consortium shall be awarded to the chiidren who lose the care and protection of their parents as 'parental consortium' and to the parents as, .hlial consortium, for the loss of their grown-up children, to compensate their agony, love and affection, care and companionship of deceased children. Accordingly, it is just and reasonable to award Rs.4O,O00/- towards spousal consortium to the petitioner.

9. Therefore, the appellant/ petitioner is entitled lor the compensation in the following terms: 1 2 3 Loss of dependency Conventional Heads Spousal Consortium TOTAL Rs.2,9O,40Ol- Rs.3O,OOO/- Rs.40,000/- Rs.3,60,4OOl-

10. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.1,49,0OO/_ to Rs.3,60,400/_ a 1zotsl ra scc r:o lzozo; e scc oa+ 5 \ \ 5 (Rupees Three Lakhs Sixty Thousand Four Hundred only) with interest at the rate of 7 .SVo per annum from the date of hling the petition ti1l date of realization. Respondent No'3 shall deposit rhe entire amount within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, appellant is permitted to withdraw entire amount along with interest accrued on it. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed To, //TRUE COPY// SD/. A.V.S.PRASAD EPUTY REGISTRAR I SECTION OFFICER

1. The Chairman, MACT-Cum- I Additional District Jude, Nalgonda (if any Lower Court records)

2. One CC to Sri K.Rathanga Pani Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CD Copies AS,AIVB .a r.i, !* HIGH COURT DATED:3010412025 STATE 1 o() \ 1\ \\\B Ni5 rD * i OESPfi JUDGMENT+DECREE MACMA.No.1783 of 2009 THE MACMA IS PARTLY ALLOWED 6l IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA MOTOR AC CID ENT CIVI L MISCEL LANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1783 oF 2009 Between: Terala Shankaraiah. S/o.seethaiah Agriculture and Kirana Busienss R/o.Bodu Vittage, Tekutapafly Mandai, xnamma"mb-iifi;. "" ''"" AND ...AppellanUPetitioner 1 2 pgthlVijgya Kumar, S/o.Josef.Driver of Auto Bearing No.Ap 20_V_8760 R/o.Cootie Line, Kothagudem viirige ind' Mai;;i Kiilmam District. Guguloth Biksham. S/o Ramulu Owner of Auto Bearing No.Ap 20_V_8760 R/o. H. No. 3-3e/.1, Binur rnanoa, idt'rirpjriv, krrIiirrX.l oi.tri"t 3. The New lndia Assurance Company Limited, rep by its Branch Manoer o/o.Branch orrice 4th rroor, e_i_a2i;, A;;;;;t i; riiil E;i# i],iiir":! Abids, Hydeerabad. 4. TheA.p.S.R.T.C.. rep by its Managing D,rector Musheerabad, Hyderabad. [Rl and R4 are not necessary in this petition] Appea t rited U nder sectio n. r^z^{ :;I:: rrr ::J:. il::: of zooo oatlJ.zdi i)lboa J; il;il "i'il iil;" and decree in M V.o.p.No .100e Il;f#,flr, Motor Accident Ctaims iriir.J_.rr_r Additionat District Judse, 9r .rr,,otor ""r This appear comino on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appear, the Judgment and Decree of the Lowei c;;;;;; [rr]e' materiat papers in the case ?nd y,pol hearing the arguments of Sri K.Rathangapani Reddy, Advocate for the Appellant and none appeared for the Respond;;t. "-' This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

1. That the Motor Accident civir Miscelaneous Appear be and hereby is parfly allowed by.enhancing the compensation from is.1,a9,000/_ to ns. g,OO,+OOI_ (Rupees Three Lakhs sixty Thousand four hundred onry), with iniere.i p 7 .5o/o P.A from the date of filing the petition till date of realization.

2. The Respondent No.3 shafl deposit the entire amount within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 3 0n same deposit, appelant is permitted to withdraw entire amount arong with interest announced on it.

4. That save as aforesaid the decree of the Lower court shafl stands confirmed in all other respects; and.

5. That there be no order as to costs in this appeal. //TRUE COPY// D sD/- A.V.S.PTJ:RASAD STRAR ECTION OFFICER \ \ To,

1. The Chairman, MACT-Cum- I Additional District Jude, Nalgonda (if any Lower Court records) 2. Two CD Copies AS/NVB HIGH COURT DATED:3010412025 DECREE MACMA.No.1783 of 2009 THE MACMA IS PARTLY ALLOWED