As per the guidelines of the Honble Apex Cc,r.rt in dictum of Sq.rla Vertna v. Delhi Transport Corporu

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREI) SUDHA M.A.C.M.A.No.3641 of 2OO8 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed against the Order dated ( 5.01.2O06 in O.P.No.523 of 2OO2 passed by the learned Chzr- rman, Motor Accident Ciaims Tribunai-cum-l-Additional Dist;-: :t Judge, at Mahabubnagar. 2 The petition ulde O.P.No.523 of 2OO2 t 'as filed by appellants / petitioners claiming compensation of I s.3,00,000/ - for the death of the deceased Asifa Begum, whc motor vehicle accrdent occurred on 26.06.2002. 'Il got examined P.Ws.1 and 2 on behz died in the e trial Court Lf of appellants / petitioners and got marked Exs.Al to A8 on their behalf. The trial Court after considering tit : oral and documentary evidence on record, granted conr rensation of Rs.1,50,000/- wrth costs and interest @ 7.Sok per annum from the date of petition till realization. Aggrieved by th , said Order, petitioners therein preferred the present apI eal seeking enhancement of the compensation amount grant€ ( by the trial Court. :at 2

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

4. The brief facts of the case are that the deceased was working as cleaner rn Mansoor hotel on N.H.7 in the limits of Kourampet village. On 26.06.2002, at about 9 PM, while she was returning to her house from hotel, the driver of the lorry bearing No.KA 02 C/5656, driven it in a rash and negligent manner and dashed her. As a result, the deceased sustained multiple grievous injuries and succumbed to injuries. The PS Jadcherla, registered a case in Cr.No.126 of 2OO2.

5. Heard arguments of both sides and perused the entire evidence on record

6. The iearned Counsel for the petitioners stated that the deceased was aged about 35 years as on the date of accident. She was working as a cleaner in a hotel and earning Rs.lOO/- per day. As per Ex.AI-FIR, Ex.A2-Inquest report and Ex.A3- PME report, the age ofthe deceased was mentioned as 35 years, but the trial Court observed that P.W.l in his evidence stated that he was aged about 45 years and his wife was 5 years j J younger to him. Therefore, her age must have be: r aged about 40 years. As there is no document to prove tlt : age of the deceased, it can be speculated by increasing 5 yez rs of the age mentioned in the document and considered her a 3 :as45to50 years. As per Ex.A3 PMtr report, the age of the der: 'ased was 35 years. Therefore, this Court finds that it is just ar: l reasonable to consider the age of the deceased as 35 years. 7 - Perusal of the record shows that the decea s ed r.vas aged about 35 years, working as cleaner in a hotel and earning Rs.3,OOO/- per month and thus the annual in:ome of the deceased would comes to Rs.36,000/- (Rs.3,O{) )/- X 12 = Rs.36,o00/-).

8. As per the guidelines of the Honble Apex Cc,r.rt in dictum of Sq.rla Vertna Vs. Delhi Transport Corporu;ion,l if the deceased was married, ll4tn of his income has to be deducted towards her personal expenses, as she has 6 deper:1ents. Thus, the annual income of the deceased aJter deduct ng personal expenses would comes to Rs.27,O00/- per annum Rs.36,0O0 - Rs.9,OOO= Rs.27,000/-) and the Honble Apex ( ourt in the dictum of National Insura.nce Compang Limited Vs. pranag ' lzooe; o scc rzt 4 Sethi2 , held that the future prospects of income of the self- employed shall a.lso be included in determination of the compensation. Thus, considering the age of the deceased i.e., 35 years, 4O7o of the income i.e., Rs.10,8OO/- has to be added towards future prospects and thus the amount would become Rs.37,8O0/- (Rs.27,000/ + Rs.10,800/- : Rs.37,800/-). This sum rf multiplied with the multiplier 16 applicable to the age of the deceased i.e-, 35 years, it would corne to Rs.6,04,8OO/- (Rs.37,8OO x 16 : Rs.6,04,8O0/-). Thus, petitioners are entitled to Rs.6,04,800/- under the head 'Loss of Dependency'.

9. Besides, appellants/petitioners are also. entitled for compensation under 'conventional heads' as prescribed in the dictum of Nationol Insurance Comtrtang Limited Vs. Pranog Sethi, i.e., Rs. 15,OO0/- towards loss of Estate and Rs.15,OOO/- towards funeral charges and Rs.40,0OO/- under 'spousal consortium'. Therefore, they are entitled for Rs.7O,OOO/- under 'Conventional heads'.

10. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, by reiterating the comprehensive interpretation of 'consortium' given in the authorit5r of Magma General Insurance Compang Limited. as. '1zorz1 ro scc oao 5 Nanu Ra,m Alias Chuhru Ro,.tn & otherss, and in the authority between United India Insurance Conpang Linited us. Satinder Kdur (A Sahoinder l{aur and. other*, lorlihed that the amounts for loss of consortium shall be a',r arded to the children who lose the care and protection of th: r parents as 'parental consortium' and to the parents as, 'filir consortium' for the loss of their grown-up children, to conl rensate their agony, love and affection, care and companionshi r of deceased children. Accordingly, it is just and reasonaL le to award Rs.aO,OOO/- each to petitioners No.2 to 6 urr ler'Parental Consortium'. 1 1. Therefore, petitioners/claimants are enti led for the compensation in the following terms I 2 a\) Loss of dependency Conventional heads Parental Consortium @ Rs.40,0OO/- each Rs t ,04,800/- Rs; 70,O0O/- Rs.: ,00,00O/- TOTAL Rs.[,74,8OO/- \ \

12. In the result, the present appeal is allowed ,y enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.1,5O,OOO/- to t s.8,74,800/- l1zots; ta scc ro lzozoy 9 scc o++ o 6 (Rupees Eight Lakhs Seventy Four Thousand Eight Hundred only) with interest at the rate of 7 .Soh per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of realization. Though, Respondents No.l and 2 are jointly and severaily liable to pay compensation, respondent No.2/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire amount within a period of one month frorn the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. Out of total compensation amount, the appellant Nos.2 to 6/children are entitled for an amolrnt of Rs.1,OO,O0O/- each and the appellant No.1/trt.rsband is entitled for the balance amount. The appellants No.2 to 6 are minors at the time of filing the O.P in the year 2OO2, now they might have attained the age of majority. On such deposit, all the appellants / petitioners are perrnitted to r4rithdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on it. Appeliants/petitioners are also directed to pay ttre deficit Cor-rrt fee on the enhanced amount. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// D/. SRI A.V.S. PRASAD DEPUTY REGIST SECTION OFFICER To, 1

2. u-

4. t. The Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal_cum_l Additional District Judge at Mahabubnagar ,lwittr recoios, Ii;;;i'"' """' One CC to SRt. T DAtvtODAR, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRt. R LAXMTNARASTMHA RAO, Advocate iOpUCI Two CD Copies ._*_-l=M HIGH COURT DATED: 0310412025 JUDGMENT MACMA.No.3641 of 2008 1 \) hr- S r';, ( (J f 2'Jtll 2025 7_ C) * 1) c ( s,,17 t ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS \o