The High Court · 2025

: Sri Ajay Kumar Madisetty : - -' Counsel for the Respondent No.3 & 4 : Sri T'Mahender Rao The Court made the following : JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY M.A.C. M.A. No.394 of 2019 DATE:11.12.2O25 Between: Thodengala Ramnarsaiah and another Godugu Narender and seven others AND JUDGMENT: .....Appellant Respondents Reing not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in the order and decree dated 28.11.2018 passed in M.V.O-P.No.577 of 20 l0 b)' the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Cum-ll Additional District Judge, WArangtr[ (hereinafter rcferred to as "thc Tribunal"), the present appcal has been hled by the appellants- .la imants seeking enhancement.

2. The brief facts of the case arc that on 12-03-2010, at about 1:30 pm, while the deceased (son of the appellants) was proceeding on the motor cycle bearing registration No.AP-36-AA-8787 owned and driven by respondent No.1-Godugu Narender, on the main road from Palakunhy to Station Ghanpur (warangal District), the said vehicle hit cHADA vr.,AYA #i'l';il^X.""Si^ BHASKAR REDDY another motor cycle bearing registralion No.AP- 36-F-9044- As a result of the said collision, the deceased (pillion rider on the motorcycle No.AP' 36-4A-8787), fell down on the road, sustaincd grievous head and other injuries and died on the spot. The Police, Ghanpur P<-rlice Station, registered a case vicie Crirne No.3O of 2OlO under Sections 304-.4 and 338 IPC and after investigation, filed charge against Respondent No.1 (driver of the motorcycle No-AP-36-AA-8787). Stating that prior to the accident, the deceased workcd as a farm-servant (coolie) under respondent Nos.1 ald 2 earning Rs.4,5000/- per month and used to contributc his earnings to thc lamily and due to sudden demise of the deceascd, thev lost his love and depenrtcncli, the appellants-claimants filed the aforcsaid claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 166 o[ the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation of Rs.8,10,000/- on account of death of their son, initially against respondent Nos,I to 4 i.e., driver, owner and insurcr of the motor cycle bearing No. AP-36-AA- 8787 and subsequentl],, since respondent No.2 i.e-, owner of the vehicle died, his legal represcntations were brought on record as respondent Nos.5 to 8, vic'lc order dated 03.O I .2018 in I.A.No.736 of 2017.

3. Before the Tribunal, respondent Nos.1 anci 2 appeared through Advocate but did not choose to file rvritten statement within the statutory period and as such thcir right to file written statement was forfeited on 2l.O2.2Ol1. Respondent Nos.3 and 4-lnsurance company filed written statement alld additional written statement denying the CHADA VIJAYA BHASKAR REDDY Dd" ' 3 averments of the claim petition and contended that the amount claimed is excessive and prayed to dismiss the claim petition. After considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the motorcycle No.AP-36-A,4.-8787 and awarded total compensation of Rs.6,44,800/- with interest @ 7.5yo per annum in favour of the appellants-claimants, fastening Iiability on respondent No.1 and respondent No.2 (owner) represented by respondent Nos.s to 8 and absolving respondent No.3 and 4-lnsurance Company, on the ground that there was no valid driving licence for respondent No.1 as on the date ol the incident,

4. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. 'I'here is no dispute with regard to the finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurrcd due to rash and negligent driving of motorcycle No.AP-36-.{A-8787 bv Respondent No. l.

6. So far as asscssmenl of quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal determined the notional monthly income of the deceased at Rs.4,000/ , applied 4OYo addition for future prospects, reduced 50% for personal living expenscs, applied appropriate multiplier 18, and rightly awarded a sum of Rs.6,04,800/- as loss of dependency. CHADA vrrAYA fflillliliiilJs9^ '1 7, As regards compensation under conventional heads is concerned, - it is apt to refer to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Pranag Sethi's case (supra), wherein it rvas held as lollows:- "Reasonablc ftgures on conuentional he-ads, namelg, Loss of e-state, ,oss oj consortium and funeral expenses shouLd be Rs.15,OOO/-, Rs.4O,OO0/ - anrl Rs.15,00O/- respectively. The oforesaid amounts should be enhanced at the rate of lO% in euery three gears." However, in the instant case, the Tribunal erred in awarding amounts under conventional heads i.e., Rs.15,000/- for funeral expenses and Rs.15,O00/- for loss of e state, rotaling to Rs.30,ooo/-, which is highly inadequate- Taking into consideration the aforcmentioned decision, this Court is inclined to enhance the amount eranted by the Tribunal under conventional heads from Rs.30,000/- to Rs.84,000/-. The amount awarded by the Tribunal towards transportation i.e., Rs.l0,OO0/- can be maintained. Thus, the appellants-claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.6,98,8O0/ (Rs.6.04,800/- * Rs. i0,00O/- + Rs.8a,0OO/-). which is rounded off to Rs.7.OO,OO0/-.

8. Coming to the issue ol tiability, thc Tribunal concluded that respondent No.'l (driver of the motor cycle) did not possess a valid and cffective driving liccnce as on the date of the accident, and on that basis alone fastened the liability exclusively on respondent Nos, I and 5 to 8, absolving the insurer i.e., respondent Nos.3 and 4. Once the policy admittedly covers third-party risk, the claimant's entitlement cannot be CHADA VIJAYA EHASKAR REDDy D"te:202r.r21r r6:5r 23 D'gh.ly sigf,ed by<HADA +05t0. I 5 defeated by internal breaches between the insured and insurer. The deceased was a third party, and the claim arises out of statutory liability. In l(usum Lata & Others u. Sdtbir & Othersl, the Hontrle Supreme Court held that even in cascs of breach of licence conditions, the insurer must first satisfy the au':rrd and then recover the amount from the owner. Similarly, in thc recent decision in Rann(r Bci us. M./s.Amit Minerals through Incharge O;flicer/Conpetent OfJicer and anothera , the Honble Supreme Court applied the doctrine of "pay and recover", holding that the insurcr must satis$r the award at the first instance and thereafter recover thc amount from the owner. In view of the settled position, the Tribunal erred in fastening absolute liability on the driver and the owner $,ithout extending recovery rights to the I ( insurer. Accordingly, respondent Nos.3 and 4 lnsurance Company shall pay the compensation at thc first instance and shall thereafter be entitled to recover the amount from respondent Nos.l and 5 to 8, in accordance with law.

9. [n the result, this appeal is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation awarded b1. the 1'ribunal from Rs.6,44,800/- to Rs.7,00,000/- lvith interest at 7.59; pcr annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. Responder.rt Nos.3 and 4-insurer shall satisfy the award at thc first instance and thereafter recover the amount from ' AIR 2011 SC 123-1 ?2025 SCC Online SC 2067 cHADA vrrAYA 3','fltii!i*kT39^ BHASKAR REDDY:;:'i;:" '"'"'' " I 6 respondent Nos.l and 5 to 8. The remaining terms and conditions of the Tribunal shall stand unaltered. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous pctitions pending, if any, shall stand closcd. //TRUE COPY// Sd/. U. SUDHA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR G SECTION OFFICER To, 1 . The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-ll Additional District Judge at Warangal. (With records)

2. One CC to Sri Ajay Kumar Madisetty, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri T.Mahender Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies Svsi DL le: .t HE SIA 0 2 rEB 2028 o L) k HIGH COURT DATED:1 111212025 JUDGMENT + DECREE MACMA.No.394 of 2019 PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA @ L? [ 3296 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF DECETMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 394 OF 2019 Between: 1- Thodengala Ramnarsaiah, S/o.Yellaiah, aged 60 years, Occ. Coolie 2. Thodengala Uppalamma, Wo.Ramnarsaiah, aged 50 years, Occ. Coolie, Both are R/o. lppagudem Village, Station Ghanpur lt/andal, Warangal District. ...Petitioners/Appellants AND 1 Godugu Narender, S/o.Laxmaiah Aged 36 years, Occ. Driver of the vehicle and agriculture Rl/o. lppagudem Village, Station Ghanpur [t4andal Warangal District. G. Laxmaiah (died), per LRs respondents 1, 5 to I S/o. Komuraiah, aged 57 years, Occ. Owiler of the vehicle R/o. H no. 1-11913, Shivunipally Village, Station Ghanpur Mdl Warangal District. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 M/s. Bajaj Allianz General lnsurance Company Ltd., Rep by its Regional Itilanager of its office situated at GE Plaza Airport Road, Yenwada, Pune 41 1 006. M/s. Ba.laj Allianz General lnsurance Company Ltd., Rep by its Branch Manager of its office situated at 1 st Floor, Loyal Arcade,Subedari, Hanamkonda, Warangal. Godugu Venkatamma, W/o. Late Laxmaiah Aged 61 years, Occ. Housewife, Rr/o. H no. 1-11913, Shivunipally Village, Station Ghanpur lvldl, Warangal District Godugu Surender, S/o. Late laxmaiah Aged 38 years, Occ. Agriculture, H no. 1-11913, Shivunipally Village, Station Ghanpur lvldl, Warangal District Godugu Raju, S/o. Late Laxmaiah, aged 35 years Occ. Agricuutre, H no. '1- 1 19/3, Shivunipally Village, Station Ghanpur Mdl, Warangal District. Godugu @ Avula Rajeshwari, D/o. Late Laxmaiah, aged 31 yeas, Occ. House wife H no. 1-11913, Shivunipally Village, Station Ghanpur Mdl Warangal District ...Respondents Appeal filed Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the Judgment and decree in M.V.O.P.No.577 of 2010, daled .28.11 .2018 on the file of the lvlotor Accidents CIaims Tribunal-cum-ll Additional District Judge at Warangal. This Appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the.iudgment and Decree of the Lower court and the material papers in the case and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Ajay Kumar Madisetty, Advocate for Appellant and of Sri T.lt/ahender Rao, Advocate for Respondent Nos.3 & 4. This Court doth order and decree as follows :

1. That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and hereby is partly- allowed.

2. That compensation awarded by the Tribunal be and hereby is enhanced from Rs.6,44,8001 to Rs.7,00,0001 with interest al7.5o/o p$ annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.

3. That Respondent Nos.3 and 4-insurer shall satisfy the award at the first instance and thereafter recover the amount from respondent Nos.1 and 5 to 8. 4. That the remaining terms and conditions of the Tribunal shall stand unaltered. 5. That save as aforesaid, the decree of the tribunal shall stands confirmed in all other respects; and

6. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. Sd/- U. SUDHA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR e SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY//

1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-ll Additional District Judge at Warangal. 2 Two CD Copies v To, SVS HIGH COURT DATED:1 111212025 DECREE MACMA.No.394 of 2019 PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA @ \fl\il"r,