The High Court · 2025

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA M.A.C.M.A.NO.298 ()F 2o/2t JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed by the claimants aggrieved by the Order and Decree dated t7.OL.2O2O in M.V.O.P.No.406 of 2014 passed by the Chairman, Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Vlll Additional District Judge, Nizamabad (for short "the Tribunal") .

2. For convenience and clarity, the parties herein are referred to as they were arrayed before the Tribunal.

3. The case of the petitioners beforc the Tribunal u,as that on

18.05.2014 the deceased-Diti Sailoo @ Chinna Sailoo was travelling as a pillion rider on motor bike bearing No.AP-2S-AR- 2OO5 from Odyatpally Village to Nizamabad, while one Diti Sairam was riding the motor bike, when they reached Viceroy Garden at around 9:00 p.m., the rider of the motor bike has driven it in a rash and negligent manner at a high speed, lost control over it and Cashed to a road divicier and as a result both the deceased and the rider sustained injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to Government Hospital, I',lizamabad, where the deceased succurnbed to injuries while undergoing treatment on 19.O5.2OI4. The petitioner sought a compensation of Rs.9,0O,00O/-. 1 \

4. The respondent No.1 remained cx-parte. .- 'o) 2 ETD,J MACMA No.298_2021

5. The respondent No.2 has Iiled counter denying the material averments of the petition with regard to the occurrence of the accident, age, avocation and income of the deceased. It is further contended that the rider of the motor bike was not holding a valid driving license and thus, their Insurance company is not liable to pay any compensation.

6. Baseci on the above pleadings, trial court has framed the following issues for trial:- l.

2. 3' w.hether on r8.os.2or4 at about 9:oo p.m., in front cf vicerog G<rden, iiizamabo.d, acctd-ent ocatrred due n rash ana'-negrigeit clriuittg of motor cgcle No.Ap_25_AR_2OOS bg its rider? wtuzlher Diti saitoo reeiued injuries in twt accident ond. d.ied. on tlut injuries? wret.her the petitioners are entitred for compensqtion? If so, to what anount andfrom which respond.ent?

4. 'lit rLtltctt reliej?

7. To prove their case, the petitioners got examinecl pws 1 to 4 and got marked Exs.Al to all. on behalf of the respondents, r1o oral evidence was adduced, but Ex.Bl was marked. 8- Based on the evidence on record, the Tribunal in o.p.No.43g of 2O14 has awarded a compensation of Rs.8,42,BZSl-. Aggrieved by the said award, the present appeal is preferrr:d by the claimants. ETD,J MACMA No.298 2021 3

9. Heard the submissions of Sri Surender Reddy' learned counsel for the appellants and sri N.J SUnil Kumar, learned counsel for resPondent No.2-

10. In view of the above rival contentions, the points that arise for determination in this Appeal are as follows:- 1

3. Wetlrcr the claimants are entitled to enhancement of compensation? Whet?rcr the Order and Decree of tlrc Tibunal need ang interference ? To what relief ?

11. Point No.1:- a) The contention of claimants is that the deceased was a contractor and was earning around Rs.25,OOO/- per month by doing Mason work and by constructing the buildings on contract basis. The deceased was aged '46'years as per the Post Mortem Examination Report and PWl asserted that the deceased was working as a Mason. No proof can be expected in this regard- The tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased to be Rs. IO,OOO l- per month which appears to be justified' b) Before the tribunal, there was another o.P.No.4O6 of 2OL4, u,herein there were four petitioners and the O.P was filed by the l"t wife and her children, while the present appeal arises out of O.P.No.438 of 2OL4 frled by the 2"d wife and daughter. )i 4 ETD,J MACMA No.298_2021 c) compensation has to be awarded as per the guidetines laicl down by the Apex court in Nationar rnsurance compang Limited vs. pranag sethi & othersr, the triburnar has rightry taken all the components and has awarded a compensation to the extent of Rs.8,42,875 to these two petitioners in O.p.No.43g of 2or4 and has further awarded an amount of Rs.6,g9,625/- to the other petitioners i, o.p.No.406 of 2014. However, it is observed that the amount awarded under loss of consortium has to be increased, bccause the ,urrife r.r,'as awai-ded only Rs.4o,ooo/- and the daughter was nol awa-rded env narental conSortiUm. d) In the light of pranag sethi's case, Rs.15ooo/- towards loss of estate and Rs.15,00o/- towards funerar expenses and Rs-4o,oOo f - towards loss of consortium have to be awarded and the said amounts shourd be enhanced by 1o%o every three years. e) rn Magma Generar rnsurance comtrtang Limited, o. Nanu Ram @ chuhnt Ro,m and others2, the Apex court has eraboraterv discussed the principles laid down in pranag sethi,s case and has further held that not only the spouse but the parents and children of the deceased are also entitled to loss of consortium. considering the same' both the petitioners would get Rs.4g,4oo/- each. Therefore, as on date the wife wourd get Rs.4g,40o /- arfi, ilso the '(zoilr) 12 scc 236 'z(2otry t8 scc t30 I ETD,J MACMA No.298 2021 5 daughter would get RS.48 ,4ool-, However, Rs.4o,o00/- is awarded to the wife before the tribunal. Therefore, in addition to the said amount Rs.8,4O0 l- to the wife and Rs.48,4OOl- to the daughter is awarded. Further the amounts under loss of Estate and Loss of 0 Funeral Expenses have to be@ Rs.18,150/- each. The tribunal has awarded Rs.15,OOO/- under each head' Hence, (Rs'3'15O + Rs.3,150) i.e., Rs.6,300/- is awarded under the said heads over and above the amount awarded by the tribunal' g) Thus, the petitioners are further entitled to the enhanced amount of Rs.63,1O0/- in addition to the compensation of Rs.8,42,8751 - that was granted by the tribunal' h) Therefore, the compensation to which the petitioners are entitled is calculated as Rs.9,O5,9751-, while the Tribunal has awarded Rs.8,42,8751-.Hence, it is held that the petitioners are entitled for enhancement of compensation' Hence, point No.1 is answered accordingly' L2. Point No.2: It is held that the order and decree of the Tribunal need to be modified with regard to the quantum of compensation. This Court the compensation to Rs.9,05,9751- from that of fr"" ".rf,"nced Rs.8,42,8751- that is awarded by the Tribunal- II I \ \ 6 ETD,J MACMA No.298_2021 Point No.2 is answered accordingly.

13. POINT NO.3: In the resurt, the appeal is partly alrowed, modifying the order and Decree dated LT.or.2o2o in M.v.o.p.No.406 of 2or4 passed by the chairman, Motor vehicle Accident craims Tribunal_ cum-vIII Additional District Judge, Nizamabad, enhancing the compensation from Rs.g,42,gZS/_ to Rs.9,O5,9 TS/_ and the enhanced amount of compensation shall carry interest @ z.5o/o per annum from the date of claim petition till realization. However, the interest for the period of deray if any, is forfeited. The respondents are directed to cleposit the compensation amount with accrued interest withi. a period of tr,vo months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment after deducting the amount ir-any already deposited. on such deposit, the claimants are entitled to withdraw the said amount without furnishing any securit5r. Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, in this appear, shall stand closed. SD'- MOHD.ISMAIL DEPUTY REGISTRAR \'\ S OFFICER ,ffRUE COPY" To, 'Nizamabad.

1. The Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Vlll Addl. District Judge) at 2. One CC to SRI S. SURENDER REDDY, Advoclrtq tqPUCl 5.*One CC to SRl. N.J.SUNIL KUIvIAR, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies GE/PSL !r HIGH COURT DATED:2 510712025 JUDGMENT MACMA.No.298 ot 2021 -l' \ rlt S rl0Et2ffi * +- PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS G "d't IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD t34/,4l FRIDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA Between:

1. Diti Laxmi and. another, !v/9. Late Diti Sailoo, Age. 42 years, occ. Household, Both are R/o. H.No.5-11-70, Yellammagutta, Nizamabad. -

2. Diti Latha, D/o. Late Diti Sailoo, Age. 24 years, Occ. Household, Both are R/o. H.No.5-1 1-70, Yellammagutta, Nizahabad. AND ...APPELLANTS/PET|TIONERS

1. Mr. Dontula Raju,_s/o.. Liru?n! A_gg._l,l?ior, occ. owner of motorcycle bearing No.AP.25.AR.2005, R/o. H.No.S-1 1 -87S, Yellammagutta, Nizamabad.

2. National lnsurance Cgnlpirny Limited, Represented by its Branch Manager, Branch Office, B-Laxmiraj Complex Jawahar-Road, Nizamabad. (vide policy certificate no. 3901023113620361171 valid from O3tO2t2O14 to 02t02t2015) ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, against the order and decree dated 17.O1.2020 passed in M.V.O.P. No. 438 of 2014 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Vlll Addl. District Judge) at Nizamabad. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and the material papers in the case and upon hearing the argument of SR! S. SURENDER REDDY, Advocate for the Appellant and none appeared for the Respondent No.1, and SRI N.J. SUNIL KUMAR appeared for the Respondent No.2. This Court doth Order and Decree as foltows:

1. That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneus Appeal be and is hereby parly allowed. i/

2. That the compensation be and is hereby enhanced from Rs.8,42,875/- to Rs.9,05,975/- and the enhanced amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7.5Yo per annum from the date of claim petition till realization, and the interest for the period of delay if any, is forfeited.

3. That the respondents be and are hereby directed to deposit the compensation amount with accrued interest within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment after deducting the amount if any already deposited. On such deposit, the claimants are entitled to withdraw the said amount without furnishing any security.

4. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. SD'- MOHD.ISMAIL OEPUTY REGISTRAR llTrueCopyll To

1. The Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Vlll Addl. District Judge) at s ON OFFICER Nizamabad. 2. Two CD Copies. GE/PSL w F 4/ HIGH COURT DATED:2 510712025 DECREE MACMA.No.298 ot 2021 PARTLY ALLOWING THE WITHOUT COSTS L\ .oe*N X..-