The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Appellantsl to 5 : Sri. Rama chandar Rao v ,muganti Counsel for the Respondent No.4: Sri S. Agasthya Sharm.r Counsel forthe Respondent Nos. 'l to 3: None Appeared The Court made the following; JUDGMENT THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA M.A.C.M.A.No.334 of 2023 JUDGMENT: Heard Sri Ram Chandar Rao Vemuganti, learned counsel for the appellants/claimants and Sri Agasthya Sharma Sridi, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4/Insurance Company Perused the entire record.

2. This is al appeal preferred by the appellants/claimalts aggrieved by the compensation awarded by the learned Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Ill Additional District Judge, Karimnagar (for short 'the Tribunal') in M.V.O.P.No.562 of 2018, dated 21.11.2022, wherein, compensation of Rs.12,15,500/- with interest @) 7.5 % per annum has been awarded in a claim petition filed by the claimants seeking compensation of Rs.20,00 ,OOO l-

3. The appellants/claimalts filed the claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.20,OO,O00/- from the respondents jointly and severally on account of death of one K.R. Jawahar in a road tra-ffic accident that occurre d on 28.10.2017, at about 21 hours, in front of Little Flower Degree College, Uppal. On the said date, the deceased was proceeding on his motor cycle bearing No.TS O9-EF- 4768 to Ranigunj, Secunderabad to purchase required electrical 2 goods on wholesale as per the order placed by r s employer and after completion of his work, while he was going tc, ris house, u,hen he reached near Little Flower school, situated i t Uppal, a bus bearing No.TS-O8-UB 5266 which was hir:1 by TSRTC, Hayathnagar bus depot. driven by respondent No. came in a rash ald negligent manner with high speed and dashe: the motor cycle of the deceased from backside, due to which, : re deceased fell down and sustained severe bleeding injuries to , ita_l organs ald died on the spot. On account of the death of tf e deceased, the claimants filed claim petition seeking compensatio I

4. The claimants got examined PWs I to 3 i nd got marked Exs.A1 to A1O. Respondent No.4 did not examine my witness, but got marked Exs.B1 and 82

5. Upon exan'rining the oral and documentar . evidence, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.12, 15,50() - with interest @ 7.5% per annum payable by respondent Nos. 1, and severally. Respondent No.2-TSRTC was () 3 and 4 jointly :onerated from liability to pay the compensation, in view of Er 81, Agreement dated 12.0i.2O15, under which the bus was hired. ,y TSRTC, while the third-party risk was to be owned by the ownr r of the vehicle and respondent No-4 who is insurer of the vehicle. , .ggrieved by the 3 said order and decree passed by the Tribunal, the present appeal has been preferred.

6. In grounds of appeal, the claimants contended that the Tribunal erred in taking the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 10,000/ per month in view of the evidence lead through pW-3 and Ex.Alo-Salary Certihcate. Further, it is contended that loss of consortium i.r,as awarded oniy to appellant No.1 and loss of parental consortium and hlial consortium is not awarded to appeliant Nos.2 to 5.

7. During arguments in appeal, emphasis is made on the income of the deceased being taken at Rs. 10,000/- per month in view of the oral evidence of PW-3, who deposed that he paid Rs.2O,O00/- as salary to the deceased for his work of purchase and transport of electrical goods from Raniganj to Kakinada. Further, reference is made on Exhibit Alo-Salary Certif,rcate issued by PW-3 to support the contention of the appellants that the deceased had income of Rs.20,00O/- per month. In that context, learned counsel for the appellants relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Mohammed Siddique and Another v. National fnsurance Company Limited and Othersr, wherein, the income of the deceased was taken as Rs.9,600/- per month for the - 11zozo1 : scc sz 4 accident that took place on 05.09.2008. It is enr rhasized that in the said case too, PW-2 was examined and sala- certificate was marked and the said evidence was taken as the basis for considering the income of the deceased at Rs.9,o )0/ , by setting aside the finding of the Hon'lcle High Court of ll :lhi, which has taken the income of the deceased at Rs.3,683 I -. I - is argued that the facts and circumstances of the present appeal z re similar to the facts ald circumstances in Mohammed Siddiqr e case and as such, prayed that a reasonable income be take: in the present appeal. It is further argued that appeilant Nos.2 to i ar-e entitled for payment of parental consortium of Rs.44,000 each in all respects. B. .Learned counsel for respondent No.4 referrr d to paragraph No. 17 of the impugned order passed by the 'f ibunal for the reasoning given therein for the purpose of takir 1 income of the deceased at Rs.10,0OO / -. Tl:re Tribunal discussed rra_l evidence of PW-3 and the contents of Ex.A1O. Except the oral e ridence of PW-3 and Ex.A10, there are no supporting documents t I establish that the deceased worked under PW-3 and that he wir ; paid salary of Rs.2O,OOO/ per month. Therefore, the Tribunal disbelieved the contents of Ex.A10 and proceeded to consider the rotiona_l income of ,Ss.1O,000 /- per month. The said fixing of no[ cna-l income at t, I .i ]I )i I I i 5 Rs. 1O,00O/ - per month is just and fair according to the learned counsel for respondent No.4. Hence, prayed that the same be confirmed. g. A perusal of the record before the Tribunal shows that the oral evidence of PW3 and Ex.A10 were considered by the Tribunal. PW3 deposed that the deceased worked under him as a Marketing Malager and was pard Rs.20,0OO/- per month. Further, it is deposed that T.A and D.A were paid as incentive whenever the deceased went out of station on work and 10% of the salary was paid towards EPF. Though PW3 deposed that 10% of the salary was paid towards EPF, no document was produced in proof of the same' When supporting document such as Attendance r6gister, Proof of payment of salary and EPF register were not produced, the same does not inspire conltdence about the genuineness of the oral evidence of PW3, Similarly, in the absence of supporting documents, Ex.A 1O Safary certilicate also does not inspire confidence.

10. The deceased was a Degree Graduate and was aged 52 years as on the date of accident. Further, he was allegedly working as a Marketing Manager engaged in buying and selling electrical wires and goods between Hyderabad and Kakinada. Even if it is assumed that ,blee notional income of an unskilled labourer would be about 6 Rs.8,0OO/- per month and a skilled labourer woult be Rs. lO,OO0/- per month, a pcrson with 52 years of age ArI C' doing business between cities locatecl at far of distances would bt urther high. As such, the notional income is taken at Rs.14,000/ 1 :r month. 1 I . Coming to the compensation under the I ead of loss of dependency to u,hich the claimants are entitled, ts per National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and othr: s2, 10% future prospects has to be added as the deceased u'ir self,employed. Thus, the net monthly income comes to Rs. 15,4O0 / (Rs. 14,OOO/- + Rs.1,aOO/-). Considering the net annual income t t Rs.1,B4,BO0/- (Rs.15,400x12\, lf 1l+ta of the said income is ci< ducted towards personal expenses, the annual contribution of tht deceased to the claimants would be Rs.1,38,600/-. If the said amt,, Lnt is multiplied by the appropriate multiplier '1 1' as was righr I . taken by the Tribunal relying on Smt. Sarla Varma Vs. I) elhi Transport Corporatlon3, the total compensation under the eead of 'loss of dependency' would be Rs.15,24,6OO/- instead cf Rs. 11,38,5O0/- as was awarded b1, the Tribunal. Further, tlr Tribunal had awarded an amount of Rs.44,OOO/- towards loss of consortium, Rs.33,OOO/- towards loss of love and affection/e; ate and funeral expenses. In addition thereof, claimant Nos.2 ar-l: 3 who are son '1zorz1 ro scc oso '13oos) o s.c.c. rzr I 7 and daughter are entitled to Rs.zt4,OOO/- each under the head of 'parental consortium' and claimant Nos.4 and 5 are entitled to Rs.44,OOO/- each under the head of 'firlial consortium'. Thus, in all, the total compensation payable u,ould be Rs.L7,77,6OOl - instead of Rs. 12,15,500/- as anarded by the Tribunal

10. Accordingly, M.A.C.M.A. is allowed in part. The compensation amount awarded by the Tribuna-l is hereby enhanced from Rs. 12, i5,5OO/- to Rs.17,77 ,600/ , which shall carry interest at 9%o p.a. on the enhanced compensation from the date of petition til1 the date of realization. The compensation amount sha,ll be apportioned among the claimants in the same proportion in which original compensation amounts were directed by the Tribunal. Respondent Nos.1,3 and 4 shaJl deposit the said amount within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. There shall be no order as to costs Miscellaleous Petitions, if aly, pending in this appeal, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SO/- A.V.S. PRASAD DEPUW REGISTRAR G SECTION OFFICER To, KV 1 2 3 4 The Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- lll Additionhl District Judge at Karimnagar. (With records, if any) One CC to Sri. Rama chandar Rao Vemuganti, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri S. Agasthya Sharma, Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies h s d HIGH COURT DATED:2210712025 t1 L i (:--'\ I 3 J JUDGMENT+DECREE [ 2 DRAFTS ] MACMA.No.334 ot 2023 PARTLY ALLOWED WITHOUT COSTS. l \,, lo$ "$ IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY,THE TWENry SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA MOTOR ACCID ENT CIVIL MISCELLANE OUS APPEAL N O: 334 OF 2023 Between: 1 2 3 4 5 AND f"rlglllrP:K-rcllana^J?yq , puila Uma Devi, Wo tate K R. Jawahar, Aged fj years occupation. Private Employee, R/o. H.No. i 2_1 j _1597/4/6 Amlei Nagar, Gandhi statue Behind Jamai_osmania, Hyderbad ereseniry i"iiiiiig.i Mukarampura a locality Karimnagar Town. Kuncha Kuchana @ Kollakonda Durgasai pragna. D/o. late K. R. Jawahar, Wo. Shiva Kumar,Ige 23 years. Occl Stuoenl" Kunchana @. Kuchana Pruthvi Raj, S/o Occupation. Student Kunchana @ Kuchana Umarani, Wo. Kuchana Ramalingam, Age. 64 years, Occ. Household Kunchana @ Kuchana Ramalingam, S/o. K. Balalingam, Age g5 years, Occ. Nit. AII are R/o. H.No. 12-1 1-1587/tu6, Amber Nagar, Gandhi Statue Behind /,amai Osmania, Hyderbad presenily residing ii 'Mukarrrprra a tocitiiv ' ...Appellants/petitionbrs No.l to S ^anmnagar late K.R. Jawahar, Aged 22 years town. - - ' 1 . KAdari Srinivas, s/o.,Sathaigl

4.gs_e_1 years, occ. Driver of the Bus bearing No. TS-08-U 8-5266 h i red_with tSntc,'Hayainn a ga r Bus D"-p"1 ilA';ft ;d" District, R/o. H.No. 2-77, Bacharam Vitiage, RUOuilapr r''"i I,lLnJ"f R"r;;;; Ranga Reddy District.

2. The Telangana state Road rransport corporation, Bus Bhawan, RTC cross Roads, Musheerabad, Hyderabaa Rep. by its Managing Oiiecioi,

3. Surakanti Dhanamma, W/o. Surakanti Bhuian Reddv. Aoe. 40 vears R/o ! tl9. n_a;!-pzll28, Raja.Rajeshwari Cotony noaO (rj. gl Hayair,*iri, irnsu Reddy_District (owner 6f the-bus bearins No rs_oa_ue_izot nii.JWith tSR tC, Hayathnagar bus depot, Rangi Reddy District 4. National lnsurance company Limited, Divisionar office, Karimnagar H.No. 2- 3-183, 184/A, llnd Ftoor Sadguru Comptex, Kaman to erJii"rdH;jO, '- - Karimnagar Represented by-its Divisiohal Manager. '-"' ...Respondents/Respondents'No.i to 4 Appeal filed Under section 173 of Motor Vehicres Act,-r9BB against the order and decree in M.v.o.P.No. 562 ot 2o1B dated.21111t2022 on the fil6 of the court of the chairman, Motor Accident claims Tribunal-cum-lll Additional District Judge at Karimnagar. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing tl e grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and the materi; I papers in the Case and upon hearing the arguments of Sri. Rama chandar Rao V,: ruganti, Advocate for the Appellant and of Sri S. Agasthya Sharma, Advocate for re Respondent No.4 and none appeared for the respondent No.'l to 3. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows: '1. That the fulotor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal be , nd hereby is allowed rn part;

2. That the compensation amount awarded by the Tribui enhanced from Rs.'12,15,5001 to Rs.17,77,600/- whiclr al be and hereby is ;hall carry interest at 9%p.a. on the enhanced compensation from the date o' retition till the date of realization;

3. That the compensation amount shall be apportioned ari the claimnants in the same proportion which original cc rng the claimnants in lpensation amounts were directed by the tribunal;

4. That the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and 4 shall deposit ttrr two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Jurk 5. That save as aforesaid, the Judgment and decree of th: said amount with in ment; Tribunal shall stands confirmed in all other respects; and 6- That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. To, //TRUE COPY// S D/. A.V.S. PRASAD I) :PUTY REGISTRAR :9 SECTION OFFICER

1. The Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- I Additional District Judge at Karimnagar. (With records, if any)

2. Two CD Copies KVR/gh a HIGH COURT DATED:2210712O25 DECREE MACMA.No.334 ot 2023 PARTLY ALLOWED WITHOUT COSTS. 06 6 yL