As per the guidelines of the Hon'ble Apex Court in dictum of Scrla Vertna v. Delhi Transport Corporation,l if the deceased was married, I l

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUI}TICE P.SREE SUDHA M.A.C.M.A.No.892 of 2Ol4 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed against the Judgment and decree dated O1.O3.2O12 in O.P.No.799 of 2009 passed by the learned Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Il- Additional Dist nct Judge. Wa rangal.

2. The petition uide O.P.No.799 of 2OO9 was filect by the appellants / pe titioners claiming compensation of Rs. 18,50,0OO/ - for the death of the deceased Arelli Mallaiah, who died in the motor vehicle accident occurred on 1O.06.2OO9. The trial Court got examined P.Ws.1 to 3 on behalf of the appellants/ petitioners and got marked IDxs.A 1 to A5 on their behalf and no oral or documentary evidencc was adduced on behalf of the respondents. The trial Court after considering the oral and documentary cvidence on record, granted compensation of Rs.18,56,475/-, but held that appellants/ petitioners are entitlcd to onl_v half of the amount i.e., Rs.9,28,237/- along with interest @ 60/o per annum from the date of petition till realizatron, as Lhere is contributory negligence. Aggrieved by the said Judgmcnt, they preferred the present appeal and also ":: 'i':..' 2 seeking enhancement of the compensation amount granted by the trial Court

3. Parties hereinafter referred to as petitioners and respondents as arrayed before the trial Court for the sake of convenrence.

4. The brief facts of the case are that on 1O.O6.2O09, the deceased Arelli Mallaiah, attended his duty and returned to his house on a motorcycle bearing No.AP 36 D 6578 and in front of K.M.C, Warangal, when he was crossing the road towards Rangampet, the driver of the car bearing No.AP 9 AN 6287 drove it with high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the deceased motorcycle. As a result, the deceased fell down and sustained grievous injuries and died while undergoing treatment in KIMS Hospital, Hyderabad on 1 1.06.2009. The police, Matwada registered a case in Cr.No.167/T 223 of 2OO9 under Section 3O4-A of IPC against the driver of the car.

5. Heard arguments of both sides and perused the entire evidence on record. ) The learned Counsel for theletitioners mainly contended 6. that the trial Court erred in hoiding that the accident in question was caused due Lo the contributory negligence on the part of the deceased- The trial Court ought to have fixed the total liabiiity against the respondents' Therefore, requested the Court to modify the Order of the trial Court' 7 . Admittedly, in the counter the plea of contributory negligence was not clearly taken, it is simply stated that there was collusion between the owner of the vehicle and police, as such there u'as contributory negligence' Moreover, the Charge Shcet was hled only against the driver of the car' When there was no clear charge regarding collusion between the vehicles and there is no evidence by the respondents regarding contributory negligence, merely because they sated that there is contributory negligence in their counter, it cannot be considerecl. The trial Court erred in holding that there was contributory negligence on the part of the deceased' As per trx.AS-PME report, the deceased was aged about 50 years and per month as per trx.X1 the deceased was drawing a salary of Rs'13,540/- Therefore, this Court finds that it is just and to consider the income of the deceased as reasonable Rs.13,540/- per month as on the date of incident and thus the l I I 4 annual income of the deceased would comes to Rs.l,62,48Ol- (Rs. 13,5aol- X 12 = Rs.1,62,48o1-).

8. As per the guidelines of the Hon'ble Apex Court in dictum of Scrla Vertna Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation,l if the deceased was married, I l4t' of his income has to be deducted towards his personal expenses, as there are 4 dependents. Thus, the annual income of the deceased after deducting personal expenses would comes to Rs. 1,21,860/ per annum (Rs.1,62,48O - Rs.4O,620: Rs.1,21,860/-) and the Hon'ble Apex Court in the dictum of Nqtional Insurrrnce Compang Limited Vs. Pranag SethP, held that the future prospects of income of the self-employed shall also be included in determination of the compensation. Thus, considering the age of the deceased i.e., 50 years, 3Ook of the income i.e., Rs.36,558/- has to be added towards future prospects and thus the amount would become Rs.1,58,418/- (Rs.1,21,860/- + Rs.36,558/- = Rs.1,58,418/ l. This sum if multiplied with the multiplier 13 applicable to the age of the deceased i.e., 50 years, it would come to Rs.2O,59,434l (Rs.1,58,418 x 13 Rs.2O,59,434 I -). Thus, ' (2009) 6 scc t2r '(20r7) r6 scc 680 t 5 petitioners are entitled to Rs.20,59334/- under the hr:ad 'Loss of Dependency'.

9. Besides, appellants / petitioners are also entitled for compensation under 'conventional heads' as prescribed in the dictum of Nationol Insura-nce Compang Limited Vs. Pranag Sethi, i.e., Rs.15,000/ Lowards loss of Estate and Rs.15,0OO/- towards funeral charges and Rs.4O,000/ - to petitioner No. 1 tow,ards spousal consortium. Therefore, they are entitled for Rs.70,O00/ under the 'Conventional heads'.

10. Further, Lhe Hon'ble Supreme Court, by reiterating the comprehensive interpretation of 'consortium' given in the authority of Magtna General Insurance Compang Limited os. Na:nu Rrrtn Alias Chuhttt Ram & other*, and in the authority between United India Insurance Contpang Limited as. Satinder Kaur @ Satuinder Kaur and. other*, fortihed that the amounts for loss of consortium shall be arvarded to the children who losc the care and protection of their parents as 'parental consortium' and to the parenls as, 'fi1ia1 consortium' for the loss of their grown-up children, to compensate their " (2018) 18 scc ri0 ' 1zozo.1 o scc r++ 6 :i*.Lrtl? agony, lovc and affection, care and companionship of deceased children. Accordingly, it is just and reasonable to award Rs.4O,OOO/ to pelitioner No.4 under 'Filial Consortium, and Rs.4O,00O/- each to petitioners No.2 and 3 under ,parental Consortium'.

11. Therefore, petitioners/claimants are entrtled for the compensation in the follou.ing terms: 1 2 3 4 Loss of dependency Rs.2O,59,434/ Conventional heads Filial Consorlium @ Rs.40,ooo/- Parental Consortium Rs.40 000 TOTAL Rs.70,O00/- Rs.4o,OO0/- Rs.80,Oo0/- Rs.22,49,4341-

1.2. In the result, the present appeal is ailowed by enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.9,30,0OO/- to Rs.22,49,434/- (Rupees Trven[r two Lakhs FortSz Nine Thousand Four Hundred and Thirty Four only) with interest at the rate of 7 .Soh per annum from the date of Iiling the petition till the date of realization. Though, Respondents No. 1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation, respondent No.2/Insurance Cornpany is directed to deposit the entire 7 amount within a period of oiie month from the clate of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. Out of total compensation amount petitioners No.2 to 4 are entitled to Rs.2,OO,OOO/- each and the petitioner No. 1/wife is entitled for the baiance amount. On such cleposit, all the petitioners are permitted to withdraw the said amor-rnt along with interest accrued on it. petitioners are also directed to pay the deficit Court fee on the enhanced amoLtnt. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. To, //TRUE COPY// Sd/- N. RAJAGOPAL T REGISTRAR ASS SECTION OFFICER.

1. The Chairman. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, ll Additional District Judge, Warangal(With records, if any)

2. One CC to M/s. Venkat Rao Patil, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CD Copies ADK/gh \Lr,.- HIGH COURT DATED:2410112025 JUDGMENT+DECREE MACMA.No.892 of 2014 i I l ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS

6."Sd* #" 2 DRAFTS e lHE St o( i) \:) 21 APR zOE a 1,'.' ':. . , :: c -< ,'.| IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MIS CELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 892 OF 2014 Between: 'l . Arelli Swaroopa @ Sammakka W/o. Late mallaiah, Occ: Housewife, R/o. 15-2-414, Eangampet, Warangal City, Warangal District.

2. Arelli Naresh, S/o. Late mallaiah, Occ: Student, Rlo. 15-2-414, Eangampet, Warangal City, Warangal District. 3 Arelli Swathi, D/o. Late mallaiah, Occ: Student, Rlo. 15-2-414, Eangampet, Warangal City, Warangal District.

4. Arelli Somalingamma, Wo. Narsaiah Rlo. 15-2-414, Eangampet, Warangal City, Warangal District, ...Appel lants/Petitioners AND 1 D.Sharath, S/o. Chandramouli, Occ: Business, R/o. H.No.19-12-19, Shambhunipet, Warangal City, Warangal District. 2 The Oriental lnsurance Co., Ltd., Rep. by its Branch Manager, H.No. 9-5-54, KSR Sastry Buildings, J.P.N. Road, Warangal. ... Res po nden ts/ResPo nde n ts Appeal filed Under Section '173 of lvlotor Vehicles Act,'l 988 against the Judgment and decree in O.P.No.799 of 2009 dated.01-03-2012 on the file of the Couh of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, ll Additional District Judge, Warangal. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the gro.qnds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and the material papers in the Case and upon hearing the arguments of M/s. Venkat Rao Patil, Advocate for the Appellants and none appeared for the respondents. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

1. That the lvlotor Accident Civil [Vliscellan-q.ous Appeal be and hereby is allowed by enhancing the compensation amount from Rs_9,30,0001- lo Rs.22,49,434t- (Rupees Twenty two Lakhs Forty Nine Thousand Four Hundred and Thirty Four only) with interest at the rate of 7.5o/o per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of realization ;

2. That though the Respondents No.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation, respondent No.2/lnsurance Company is directed to deposit the entire amount within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment;

3. That out of total compensation amount petitioners No.2 to 4 are entifled to Rs.2,00,0001 each and the petitioner No.1/wife is entitled for the balance amount ;

4. That on such deposit, all the petitioners are permitted to withdraw the said amount along with interest accrued on it ;

5. That the Petitioners are also directed to pay the deficit Court fee on the enhanced amount ;

6. That save as aforesaid, the Judgment and decree of the Tribunal shall stands confirmed in all other respects; and

7. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. //TRUE COPY// Sd/- N. RAJAGOPAL A S STANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Chairman, [Viotor Accidents Claims Tribunal, ll Additional District Judge, Warangal

2. Two CD Copies ADK/gh \qr HIGH COURT DATED:2410112025 DECREE MACMA.No.892 of 2014 ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS c"P@ \4 tr-,