The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Appellants : Sri T Viswarupa Chary Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GPforAppeals Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : - - - Counsel for the Respondent No.3: Sri M S Anwar Siddiqui The Court delivered the following: Judgment THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA M.A.C.M.A .No.245 9 of2Ol9 JUDGMENT This appeai is directed against the order datecl 14. 12.2OlB passed in M.V.O. F.No.27O5 of 2013 by the learned Motor Accidents Tribunal-cum-lll r\dclitional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short, 'the 'D-ibunal,), seeking just compensation along rvith interest at 78oh pe- annum and for costs.

2. The facts t hat led to hling of this appeal are that the appellants/ claimarrts l-rave fired the craim petition before tLe Tribunal seeking compensar.ion of Rs.9,oo,o00/- from the responde,nts herein jointly and severa111 . on account of death of one late S.Narsimlu in a road trafhc accident that occurred on 3O.06-2013, upon being hit by a vehicle bearing registration No.Ap 09_p_6 104 belonging Begum Bazar P.S The Tribunal grantecl compensation of Rs.7,g5,1.50/_ u.ith lnterest at 7.Sott, per ,1nnum -o

3. The details crl rhe subject accident and the liabili ty of the respondents are not in dispute. The claimants have prelerred the present appeal onl.,. seeking enhancement of compensation, relying upon the judgment of the Hon,ble Supreme Court in National 7 Ins'urance ComTtang Litnited u. Pranag Sethi and othersr, wherein, it was held that future prospects and statutory benehts such as consortium, love and affection, funeral expenses and loss of estate to a tune of Rs.70,OOO/- ought to be awarded to the claimants therein' The claimants also relied on A-I.Muthaiah a. Rathod Redga2, wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme court held that compensation exceeding the claim amount can be granted. Lastly, the claimants relied on a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Saged Sadiq a' Diutsional Mdnage4 Ilnited India Insurance Cotnpang Llrnite&, wherein the notional income of the fruit vendor is taken at Rs'6,5OO/ per month' Contending that the deceased S.Narsimlu was working as watchmart as on the date of the subject accident, the claimants sought a compensation of Rs. 15,22,5OO/- by taking notional income of the deceased as Rs.9,O00/- per month and to add future prospects at 257o and 10% increase on statutory benefits.

4.Uponconsideringtheclaim,itisseenthattheavocationofthe deceased S.Narsimlu is shown to be that of a u'atchman in the FIR and the inquest report. The Tribunal had taken Rs'4,5O0/ per month as the notional incofrie of the deceased as a watchman. The income of an unskilled labour might be taken at Rs.4,5OO/- per month' Since the deceased was a watchman, this Court deems it just and proper to 'zotz acl zzq 'z2ols{4) ALD 985 'zotq scc z:sl 3 take his notional i;:rcome as Rs.6,O0O/- per month in the year 2O13. After adding 25lh of future prospects, his monthly notional income comes to Rs.7,5O(1,/-. Since there are 4 dependents on thr: deceased, 1l4n of his monthll, income is to be deducted tou,arcls personal expenses. Thus, the notional income of the deceased comes to Rs.5,625/- per month and Rs.67,50O l- per annum (Rs.5,525/- x 12). The appropriate mtrltiplier applicable to the age of the deceirsed as per the judgment of thr: Hon'ble Supreme Court in Smt. Scrrlo: Venna a. Delhi Transport Corporationa is '14' . Thus, the loss of income comes to Rs.9,45.()O0/ (Rs.67,5OO/- x 14). The claiman is are also entitled to Rs.70,OCt0/- towards loss of consortium, love anl affection, funeral expenses arLd loss of estate, as per the judgment of t,he Hon'ble Apex Court in Pranag Sethi's case ( I supra). Further, the claim petition was filed rrr the year 2O13. Therefore, lOok increase is to be added to the statutory benehts of Rs.7O,OOO/ , w,hich comes to Rs.7,00O/ Further, considering the fact that the claimarrt Nos.2 to 4 being the childrc'r-r of the deceased, this Court is incline,l to award a sum of Rs.4,1,OOO l- each under the head of parental cronsortium as per the clecision of the Apex Court in Magma General Insurc,nce Compang Limited a. Na,nu Ram @ Chuhnt Ram and j o zoos(o)sc,.? t, 4 otherss - Thus' the total loss of income cornes to Rs' 11'54'000/ - (Rs.9,45,000/-+ Rs'77'000/- and Rs'44'O00/- x 3)'

5. In vierv of the Juclgments of the Apex Court in Laxfldn @ Laxmdn Mouryo Vs' Dirisional lfionager' oy'.Lentat Insurance Compang Limtted and lrnothe'6 and NagaPPo Vs' Gurudagal SinghT,the claimants are entitled to get more amount thal what has been claimed' Further' the Motor Vehicles Act being a beneficial piece of legislation' where Lhe interest of the claimants is a paramount consideration the Courts should atways endeavour to extend the benefit to the claimarts to a just and reasonable extent' 6. Accordingly' M'A'C'M'A is allowed' The compensatlon amount awarded by the Tribunal is hereby enhanced from Rs.7,85,750/- to Rs 11'54'000/-' However' the appellarrts shall pay the deficit Court Fee on the enhanced compensation' The enhanced compensation amount sha[ carry interest at 7 Su/o p'a' from the date of petition till the date of realization' The enhanced amount shall be apportioned among the clarmants in the same proportion in which original compensation amounts were directed bv the Tribunal' The time for depositing the said amount by the -11-, io r.^/.-, months from the date of .".pohd"'-'tt jointly and severally is two rr ' 1zota1 ta scc t:o ' tzoltl ro scc lso ' 2oo3 Acl 12 (sc) ) 5 receipt of a cop) of this judgment. On such deposit, the major claimants are permitted to withdraw their respe ctive share amounts u'ithotrl furnishing any security. There sharl be no order as to costs Miscellaneor rs Petitions, if any, pending in this erppeal, shall stand closed Sd/- N. SRIHARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// \ I "s Ec IION OFFICER To, Judge, City Civil Court, at Hyderabad(With records, if any)

1. The chairman. lVlotor Accident craims Tribunar-cum- lI Additic,nal chief 2. Two CCs to GP FOR APPEALS, High Court for the State of Telangana at 3. One CC to Sri f Vrswarupa Chary, Advocate [OpUC 4. One CC to Sri M S Anwar Siddiqui, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies Hyderabad IOl.J-f] ADK \fl 1 ? _ r. r'{rra ', - G-.IIE l \ ,# .i. ';t, HIGH COURT DATED:0710212025 JUDGMENT+DECREE MACMA.No,2459 ot 2019 {HE ST4 r(' oIr ( + o O 1D Ar',fl zffi {1 J' \ .a'' . -.-:.'-'.,.,.-.';.; 2 DRAFTS ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS 9\a5 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA MOTOR ACCI DENT CIVIL MISCELL ANEOUS APPEAL NO: 245 9 0F 2019 Between: Household, Narsimlu, aged about 45 Years, Occ

1. Smt. S. Pochamma, Wo late S 2. S. Lavanya, D/o. Late- S Narsimlu, aged about 26 years' Occ- Student' 3. S. Swamy, S/o, Late S. Narsimlu, aged about 24 yearc' Occ' Student' 4. S. Ramesh. S/o. Late. S. Narsimlu, aged about 23,years' Occ' student' All are R/o. H. No 1-68 rrltrqt, nll,J'iJ'rr"Virr'g"' c'jwel'Mandal' Medak District' ...Claimants AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Prrncipal secretary to Home' A P Secretarait, HYderabad

2. lnspector General ot Police, Police Transport Organisation. Petlaburi, Puianapool, Hvae,ao"i'i6;;t;i Btg J;'Bizir PS Mobile Vehicle bearins No AP-09-P-6104)

3. K. Mahesh Kumar' S/o K Satyanarayana . Guard, R/o H r'ro r risiili, ii'it{"^;i["t' l-ivterabad (Amended as per order inl,c.No. t astl2o17 , dated 06 09 2018) aged 33 vears' Occ Home Respondents/ResPondents Appeal filed Under Section 173 o{ Motor Vehicles Act"l988 against the Order zotl dated 14-12-2018 0n the file of the court of and decree in M.V.O.p.No. iiiti "t the chairman, Motor Accioeni cLims rriounal-cum- lll Additional chief Judge' city Civil Court, at HYderabad. This appeal comlng on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal' the Judgment and Decree ii iri" ro*"r"court. ind ihe material oapers rn the uase and uoon hearrnq the ,|.g",rn""ntl" oi Sii- i Viswaruna Charv' Advocate for the Aooellbnts and of cP t",';p#;[ ior. InL nutpondeht uo t 'and Sri M S Anwar 3ij,i_ifii;olr"1# io, t. {:[l'p*a;i r.t"]g ,";i"""" appeared for the respondent No.2. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows: enhanced 1 2 That the [Vrotor rrccident civir Misceraneous Appear be and hereby is arowed; That the compensation amr bv the rribunar is he'ebv enhanced rrom Rs 7,85,750/- to Rs ,;:l:#l:* 3 That the appellants shall pay the deficit Court Fee on .lhe carry n,eres, a,75./.pa compensation anrount; 4. That the enhanced cor , tr]ff*[::#:ff[H:##::i' ;:ff"r,* "",, *,#,r::i,ffi::ffJ;:.,, the c,aimants in the 6 That the time for c,epositing the said amount by the respondenrs join,y and 7 rhat on such depost,;:1T:l:ff:j,;:HT:ff:: lffi: ," withdraw their respective share amounts without fur B rhat save as aroresaid, the Judsment and decree;il#r#:;rilllrr.. 9. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. confirmed in all othe,r respects, and )unts were directed by the severally is two months IITRUE COPYII To, essrsrar.rsf/hl":S+ffi N u! ECTION OFFICER 1 2 The Charrman, Ivtotor Accid +ffidtirqj:;';H'":;'ff[crarms rribunar-cum- rlr Additionar,rier ADK w HIGH COURT DATED:0710212025 DECREE MACMA.No.2459 of 2019 ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS 2qld,5