The High Court · 2025

Judgment

This zrpPeal rs fried by Lhe clilimar)ts, aggn( r,,:il Iry thc Order and Dccrce clated 09.O2 202l in N{.V.O.p.No.329 t\ _Ul ,z passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claints Tribur lL1-r:r_.rn_prr r rcipal District Judgr:. Nalgoncla (for shorL ,,1hc 'l r.tbuna1,,1

2. For corr'enir:r'rce anci clarity, the l)al.tics ht.r.r,, r :r.: refcr.red to as tl)ey s-crc arra\'ccl bclorc the'l'tilrunal.

3. 'lhe casc of tlre petitioncrs ltclbr.r. rhe [ri lL:r..r] \.,.as lltrrL on

07.O2.2017 the dcceased-Saidulu, \\,ent to the hotrs,: of nis rclzrtr'e at Vijayaraghavaput am Villurgc ancl u,hile he urrrsi r,rLurning to his nativc Villagc Ananthagirr .. his r.,r.r. lrike bcari:rr_, N..TS 05_trK_ 63611, u,hen lrc re:tc:hecl ,\j al. Kunrrr. tickls at arou ti1 7:I]0 p.nL., in the mean tirnc, one motor bil<t' ltcaring No..l.S litA O266 being drive n by rcspondcnt No. I in a r.lrsh altd negligcl. nlalnncl at a hrgh speed, d.rshecl thc motor brkt. .f thr, dece.,sr r: irr t lic ctPltitsite clirection, as zL resr-rlt Lhe dcceasetl lcll dorvn and su;.:rinr:d mlrltiple injuries. Immcdiatcly, he u,as shiftecl to Gr)vt.rr r ncr.rr_ Hospital, Kodad, from therc he *'as shifted [. I(harrmam lor r, t rcr tre.ltmenl and succumbed lo injuries rvhrle r.rnclergoirtrt I rcaLmeltt on \ T ID,J MACMA No 457-2021 2

08.02.2017. Thc pe trtrotrers sought a compensation ol Rs 30.OO.O0OI IS accidcnt, age, avocatloll contcrtclecl tha I therc

4. Ttrc lcspondt'll1 No:i 1 :Lrlcl 2 hlecl courllcr' denying Lllt: avermenLs o[ the pc]litlott rvith regard to the occurrence ol [he ancl income of the dece ase d lt is further rash and negligencc on Part of the thc accident and that the deceascd did deccased cor-rtributing Lo not posscss valid rlrrvrng lit (:r'rsc as or-r the date of accident lt ts furrher cot-rtcnded Lhirt tll(r os'ner and itlsurer of motor bike bearing No.'I'S-05 trli 636 1 rlrc zrlso necessetry parties to thc procccdings and that the peLrtion is bad for non-joinder of the neccssal.\ pzrrties. Ir ts ltrrtller contended that the rider of thc motor bike bcaring No TS 05 trK-6361 and TS-29A 0266 was not driving licctrsc. It is lhereforc contended by the No.3 th:rt llr(rir company is not liable to pay furtht:r conLendcd thzrt motor bike bearing compensatron. It is No.TS-29A-0266 has violatccl lcrms aud conditions' as he handcd over thc s:rid motor bikc to t'he rider, who clocs not have effective driving Iicctrse as on Lh(-' cla Lc of the acciclcnt and it is only the ou,ncr of tl-rc vehiclc u'ho is liable to pay compensation' having valid rcspondct.t t

5. Elascd on lhc abovc rival contenlions' the Tribunal has framd-cl thc lbllos'ing Issucs:- J tT0,l riAC\lA No.4r / 2021 W'ltetlter Dsarlct Srtululu {lt...l ut llle tol(l ctc( i! t otl 07.02.201.' ttl 7:3(t p.rtr.. el Vi jaqaraghauc4;Lturrt Villatr of !lh!tr.l(lei.L ,1 | t roslt cttttT lleqlrrJfrr, Llnt u!al a,i' j\1ok)t'i tlric l)('eti ! O,2 66 itil its.lnt\,] t l,lrctliet ihe,rrill/(r,r.,r.s lr, L,ltlrll€,(i Ji:ttrt Lr hont on(l La tDlt.tl (1nt )unt.' t.i) t't)tttJ t; t ot <:ttrr etl ski'ls o/' .Jt'-lue lo r Li 19 ..i ti illc/t. l/

3. To tt'ltet reLie.l rrrrrl rr.r.sls b. To provc their casc, thc pctiloners qot cxanl I :'d l)Ws I .1 ancl I'lxs.A I to A8 rver-c nlarkcd On bch:rll ol' tltc t, ;pondcnts, no oraL cvidencc $,as adduced

7. Bascd on the evidencc on record, Lhc 'l'nbulL, l has; gran t r:cl a conrllcl)sation of Rs.7,91,80O/- \\'ith irrt(,tcsl ir l l) -' r lIr'r r l r.l rI.) Aggrievecl by rhe same, t[]c prcscnt app.,al is l)-1 in ccl lx the cl.rimants sceking enhancclDent of contpcusitIiorr

8. Heard the submissions of Smt. Annapr l':.na Srccram, learned coLtnsel for thc al)pcllalls atrd Sl'i '1. Sr r.. av 1... Singh learned crollnsel for respondcnt No..3

9. l,ertrned counscl Ibr the appt'llanr ltas srr]r r rtc, 1 tlt.rr thc tril;unal lailed to apprccialc t}-rc cviclcnt c nl prol)c: i-., rsi),--ctiv(. ztnd has awarcled a very lo\\, conrpertsatlon. SItc, l-rLrthc: .1 guccl th:ll the tribu:ral has considere<l thc incorne of thc dccczrsr.r t lo l rr-. vcr\/ lo\(r as Rs.8,0OO/-, though thcy have filecl Salarl, (,,'r' illczrtc under Ex.A8 and also have lead the evidencc ol' PW3 SItr 'r,rrther.rrgued that thc lribunal failed to consider lOok of Lhe incoir'l to bc aclded IiD.] MACMA No.457 2021 4 tou'ards futurc prospccts rrhtlc an'at-ding compensation Shc has also cot-tlcnrlt:d llrat tlrt' trrllurlal \\as \\'rong in attributing con[riltut<;rv ut:gligctlt:'l to tlic ilece:rsec] She Ll.tereforc' prat'cd to allo',t' hcr aPPcal. lO. Learncd coutlscl lbr tltc t t:spotldent on thc other hand has submittcd thaL ll-re clatrnetnls could nol provc thc Salarv certificate undcr Dx.A3, as PW'l failccl to ans\\'er u'ith regard [o tile mainLcn:- tcc ol rc:gislct's:rllr:l tllore pal'ticularl]- acquittance registcr and tailcd to proclttcc rtnt rr:cord supporting his cvidence [{e not to cor-tsiclcr the salary certificate and therefore, PraYCcl submitted that the t ribunal $'as rigl-rl in assessing the incomc of thedeccascdasRs,t},O0oi.pefmontll.Helurthcrarguedthatthe petitione rs havc failccl ro [ilc the cL'iving license of the deceased and theaccidentoccurrcdirrtheopposiledirection,thereforc,the tribunal has held th.lt thc tl'ccasecl s as rash and ncgligent and thus, contributcd Lo tlle act:irlr:t-tt He lhere lore ' praved to uphold the orders o[ lhe tribunal

11. Based on lhc alrove r-ival submission' this Court frames the following points for con sidc rzrtion: -

1. whetllcr ttP cltttntanls (Lr(' etltitlecl for enhc.ncemer.t oJ compensation? 2.whetherthereu).,lsulLlJcotltibutorynegltgenceortparlofthe tn" )""ii' t"it beiing No TS-29 A 0266 at rlecectsttd "'t'u 'u'J'l"Li'''9' lho lit\e <)f the at:cidettt? ,., / / -.I9qryY --it-_ 7 ). l\t'ltt llu'r llte Ordet Ittt'rft't r,rr.r':)

1. -i'o tttltrtt tt !tel-,) I -2. Point No. 1:- tl D,l . .iaMr tlr l1l' .U021 ond Decre? jr..rs.s.r(i bU ille i' otet tLeed ang iL) Thc r:ontcntiolr of thc appellant's coltnsel is tl',, ilr -' trilr.rnal hi,rs qrantccl vt'n lorv comper-rsaLion and has nct ,usi:Lercrl tlte salarl cr:rtili<:.ltc Iilcd undcr Ex.A8 A pcrusaI oi ]..,.A-! rcr,r'nls lhar I it is issu<:d try Sri Satyanara\.ana Su'am1, Stc,: c Clnr sher-s on t3.O5.2018 ancl it discloses that ti.rt,\ used to pa! las 15,:)00i per molrth to\\'rrrds salzrry, as thc cleccusccl r-rscd r u ork lLs a storrc/ldol CLll-ttcr, in their quaq, situated at Mo!,l rrlaip:rllr, :rnd LIraLt. lrc diecl in an arccide nt, Lhat occurred oi 07 .O2.. O i7 . b) Ttrc iruLlror o[ the documcnt is cxamincd a: 'Wili C]tranclu l\:rgt shri':,ir. It is t:licitcd in his cross ex:1min.r1i,r I 'lti irc lt:rs crnlrlovcd irrotrncl IOO rvorkers anci thart thc dcc, r,,:d 's onr: of thcln. but hc clocs not maintain arrt, rccords l)(r'r,rinirq to tl're uorkr:rs It is olicitcd from him that hc maintains .l .;,tlar-, rcgisLcr ri ith thc de tails of lhe salaries paid to the wori:r -s. The sarid rcgistcr is nol ;troduced before the Court. lt is c1i:: r:d liom him that, hc h:rs l\4ining License and has statcd tha.t l, It:,s issr.tcd Ex.Artt. Considcring the said evidence of PW3 arrl Ifx.A8, ir is I opinctl try thc trrbunal that thc cvidcncc of PW3 is ir,)l Lrust\\,ortlty. 6 ETD,J MACMA No.4S7 2021 c) The contention of the respondent counsel also in this regard is that, Ex.A8 is not provcd. I[ is borne oul by record that the deceascd is age <1 zrrouncl '35' r cars and hc tr.as rur-rr-ring a family of three persons i.c., his u'i1e :incL tu,o children. He must have becn doing somc sort of u'ork to maintain his family. In Ramachandrdppa Vs. Manage1 Rogal Sundrl.rd.m AllidtTce Insurance Compang Limitedl, the Apcx Court has held that in the absence of any proof of income u.ith regard to a labourer, Rs.4,5OO/ - per month can be safely taken as thc income. In the said case the accident occurred in the ycar 2O04, rvhile in the present case, thc :rccident has occurred in the year 2017. Therefore, on a reasonable hypothcsis, the notional income assessed b5, Lhe Triburnzrl ars fis.8,OO0/ per month appears to be j ustified. d) As per thc dicta laid dor,r.n in Nationol Insurance Compang Limited. Vs. Pranag Sethi & Others2,4O%, of the incomc needs ro be added towards future prospects. As the deceased is aged 35 ycars, adding 407o tovuarcis future prospccts i.e., 8,O00+3,200 u,ould give Rs. 1 1,2O0/ pcr month, rvhich comes to Rs. I l,2OO I - x 12 = Rs.l,34,4OO/ per anr-rum '(2orr)12scc2i6 AtR 2017 SCC 5157 1 ETD,J i.r\CM;\ No.457 2021 e) The number ol claimants hercin are thrcc ir- cr, i-hcrcfore , i / 3'(r deduction nccd to be made to he r inconte tc,r 'r- -cls perso nal Lr\p('r-lscs :.ur c-i this ,,r'oLricl comc up to Ils.89,60()1 (F:: ..1.f ,.100. (-) Ils.4 1.9O07 ). The muitipLier should be choscn u.ith regard i( Lrc age ol the de ccascd, ers pr:r colurnn No.4 of the tablc given in Sa t Ia Verma u. Delhi Transport Corpordtion3, 'l'hc de ccased l,cing agecl 35 1'c:rrs, thc appropriate multiplie r to be applied is '1 i ' l'hcrelore, the loss o[ de pcnrlcncy. is calculatcd :rs Rs. 14,33.()l )(,' i89,er00 x 16) g) In the light of Pranag Sethf's case, Rs- 15OOO iou.ards loss ol csLate and Rs.15,000/- towarcls luneral ,')ri)cnses arnd Rs.4t),000/ ton,ards loss of consortium havc to ix ,,,r'lrrcled and lhe saLicl amounts should be enhanced by 10% evcr-r I :-cc j..eius h) In Magma General Insurance Compang Lir ied u. Nalr.u Ram (@, Chuhru Ram and other{, thc Apcx Cour t lr, ; eJ:rbor:rtcly discr.rsscd thc 1>rinciples laid down in Pranag Sethi; ::erse ancl has furlhcr ]rcld that not only the spouse but the parerlls rncl chiLdren of the dcccasccl arc also entitled to loss of consorlt rLr. l'hcrclbre , lryo (6) s-( lr 1 rrld{s)18scc rro I rTD,I MACMA No.457 2021 in thc present casc, thc claimants ,,r,ould gct Rs.4g,400/_ cach tou,ards loss of consortiLun, hencc, rhc compcnsatiorr alnounL urrdcr this head would bc Rs. 1,45,200/- insrcad of Rs.4O,O00/_. Further an amounr ol [?s. lS I 50/ - tou,ards luncral cxpenses ancl Rs.18, 150/ - towards Loss o[],]st:rtc har.c Lo bc iru,arrclr:d. i) In all, the claimanrs arc cntitled to rhc follorr.ing compe nsatron amounIs: i 1. Compensatiolt uncicr thr: Itcad of loss to\\ ar ds of dcpendenct Compensation consortium Compensation towards loss of estate Compensatlon IlSES to\\ ar.ls loss of frurcral 3 4 Ils 14.33,600/ Rs. l.{r.200,/ Rs. 18, 150/ Rs.18,150/ Rs. ro, rs,ioo7 -- i j) Thc Tribunal has au.arded Rs.7,91,g001 rvhile, this Court arrir.cd zrt a compensation ol Rs.16,15,10O/- and hcncc, it is heicl that the claimants arc ontitic(l to cnhzrnc.r:mcnt of ct.r n rpc n s;_r tic.rr.t. Thus, Point No.l is ansu,ered accordingll.

13. POINT NO.2: -.a) A pcrusal of FIR and the chargc shect rcveals that it is filcd against only one person i.e., thc ridcr o[ thc motor bike bearing No.TS-29A 0266. Tlnc charge shcet docs not spcak about any rash and negligence on part ol Daarla Saridulu who is thc deccased in I 1/ 9 f TD,J i( ivlA No.457 .021 llia l)rrrscrrt cii,j(. Olc Mcklrla \/cnk:rte sltu,arlu is sr rr 'rl rs :rri r:,,e u itnt'ss irr rhc ,:harqc sheet as [,W2 l)i l'irt: c'orrtcniioLr o1- Llrc lt'sltitnc.lcrit r;oLtnscl i.. I srnr l ilrr sarcl $ it:ress is rrOI cxlrrnrned als a t r:tc $,itncss, it ci, , lr, I sul)lr()rt thc ('ilsc oi thr: pctitioncrs and that PW2 u'ho is cr r riiinr:d bclitre tht iribuntrl hrs rrot sccn thc accjdcnt and that Ir is ,r plllttcd \rrirr.( ss. I)W2 statr:ii th:rt irc tas qoirrgi on :t ntr)i,) lll.:l on llrc s:rntt n;arl :rnd that thc deceased-Saidu lu rvas goil 1 ltt:,rcl ol iiirn on anotlrcr bikc. anri lhal hc s,i(ncsscrl the acciclcl lir. rlr,ltost:d th.rt the acr:idertL ocl Ltrr-cd on O7.02.20 I7 :rnd that lr, r'i,.icr ol the bike bc:',ring No.'l'S-2()A 0266 has drivcn the mot()r' l)tk(' ir-r a rrrsh aLrd negligent -larlncr anrl colludcd ;rgainst thr: mr,t lr l<c oI rlte dece rsecl Satcittirt. Ilc <lcnied l['rc sr-tggcslion t]-rlr( irr' ]lrs rtot \\'ir:lrf sst'(1 the irr:r'iclcnt. IIis ntrmc clo<rs not l-igurr r tll( citilr-gc shcct as .r u'itircss. 'fltc_rr trieri Lo cxztmillc PW.l, trr. lris r.,,'rrlt rrr:c \\'irS ,.) SCll€ \\'e(l c) lt is bortrt' or-rt by recorcl Lltat lVlck:rla VcnkaLc ;l .r:ir-iu ,,1 lio is citcd:rs an e1,e u,itncss in thc chargc shcet was issLr( (l slutrmons Lo bc t'x.rmined .ls \\'i1ncss. 'lhe rccord discloses t.har1 tr u irs unablc to speak duc to hcad irl ur_t, sr,rstaincd lry him in tlr. rrL:t:iclt:nI and that he u,as in semi conscious stagc and u,as rrrr rl;[r to give cviclc:nce . 'l'hcrclbrc, Iris cvidcncc could not bt: rcc rr'lcci evcn on 10 ETD,J MAC[,4A No.457 2021 appointment of an Advocate Commissioner. Thus, u,hen the er-e u.it'rcss cited in Lhe chargc sheet r*",as r.rot ablc to depose because.[ the injun,sust:rincd bv hinr in the acciclent, then another person \vzi s slrmmotlcd as PW3 and examined beforc the Court. It is quile evrdent from t.he rccord that erren Mekala VenkaLeshu,arlu sustained rnjuries in the accident, as revealed from the charge sheel. This substantiates the occurrence of acciclent and thc contents of the charge shcet lurther reveal that it occurrccl onl1, due to the rash and negligencc of Maroju Venkatershwarlu. d) The tribunal has held that lhe cleceased r,r,as also negligcnt. [t gave a finding to that effect by observing that the deceased .,.vas not holding a valid driving license as on the date of the arcciclctrt and erlso was not wcaring any helmct as requircd under the Motor Vehicles Act and thus, the deceased committed breach of. manclatory provisions of Motor Vehicles Act. Thcrefore, attributing contributory. ncgligencc to [he deceased, tribur-ral has fixed the liability as 50% each on the owners and insurers of both the motor bikes. 'l'o prove contributory negligence, an act of the person contributing [o the accident should be made out. In this case, ,on u,earir-rg of a hclmet or non possessing of a driving license u,ould not directly contribute to the occurrence of the accident. Though they are rhc vioiaLio.rs under the Motor vchicres Act. the sairl ; }€EE - ''.':1" '"-:J4F qEFiF?4F- )r' .,/' .-t7 11 1D,) i, i,r Iv /\ r'J.r'itl ;r))1 factors r:annot ]re hr:ld to bc contributor-r' ncgligcntr( (rrt [)i\r[ (]1'tlre dececLsecl. l'lrtr,rlore. it is held thitt lhcre is rrr r'o.rtribr-tLory neglLge ncc i)r-r l).rr I ol' l hc cleccirsccl Poin: No.l is ansscrccl r;r;r:ordirrglr

14. Point No.3 a) [n vit't ol t)rc Iindings arrived at l)oir-tt Nos. i i n,l 2. it Ls held that the orclcr- :rnil rli:crcc of tirc Tribunirl tr<:cd to lr r rnorlilicd rvith regard to tllc (lllirntllm of corrrpcnsatior) ilnd the cx ('nl ol Iiabilitl,' This Cor-Lr t lrrrs t'rtlranr:ed tlte c()nrlle l)s:tIio11 L() t- t(,.15.100/ fronr that o1'Rs.7.91.800/- thirr is arlardcd by the 'l'.il:L.tnal ancl the saLcl cornpcnsirrion sirall bc paid tOtallv by tlte rc il-,,)llcicnts. 'l'lle Trrbrtrral Irirs r-: r irnteci intcres[ :tt th( r-ilte ol' | 2"/" or] I- r (li,ranlLlltt o[ coLnl-lcnsarlion:rnri tht: corrte rrtiOn oi tht; respondettt CLrt lscl is LIlal it rs too h i.gh b) hr Jqdau Sarojo Bai Versus Ghule Nro.ga Rao and Anothers; iL rjoorciiiratc Bench ol this l{igh Cou:'l Iras granled intcfcst (r 7.:)'li, I)cr arlnunr on thc enhan<:,:<i zrmount of c()nrpcnsatrorr I t litl'l sct oul r1c Is 61)6 I I 12 ETD,] MACMA No.457 2021 c) In Bandauath Mangla and Another Versus Band.auath Suresh and Others6 and No:tiofto.l Insurance Cotnpang Limited Versus. M. Venkatesuantlu and Othersz; also intcrest (ct:. Z.,>.n per annlrm u as granted on the enhanced amount of compensation. d) lo United Insurance Compang Limited. Versus. Bollq.m Lingaiahs; ',r'hcn the Tribunal has granted rate of intercst @) per annum, thc High Court has modified the ratc ol interest to

7.5o/o pcr annum from the date of petition till realizzrtion_ e) A Divisior-r l3ench of this I{igh Court in National Insurance Compang Limited Versus Jagad.ish prajapathie; has grantecl 7 .5 ok pcr annum on [he compensation from the date of petition tilt realization Thercforc, in the light of the above cited decisrons, this Court Q has been consistentiy granting interest @ 7.So/c, on thc compensation lhat is awarded in such cases. g) Hcnce, the same is au,arded in this case also. Thus, the rate of igtercst granted by the'I'ribunal is reduced to that of 7.5yo. \ ,,or.r, No.3 is answered accordingly I 6 202.1 scc online TS 1095 ' zo:: scc online ts t I70 * 2021 scc online TS 9l-5 'z0z+ SCC Onlrnc TS 2050 13 ETD,] i,,\CM/\ No.457 2021

15. POINT NO.4: In the rt:suit, tl-re appeal is parti5, allor',,ecl, Lttodifying the Ordcr and Dcr:rcr-' clatccl 09.02.202 I in M.V.O.P.Nr..l29 of 2017 passecl b1' thc Chairnran, Nilotor Ac't:iclcrrt C[aints T:ibunal-cum Principal District .luclge, Nalgonda, b1' cnirancing the crrmpcnsation from Rs.7,91,t1O01 to Rs.16, 15,100i -. Thc rate L.rl ittterest is reduccd from 1291, lo 7 .5o/o p(] r atlllum from tht-' ri,rLe of claim petitLon lill realization. l{ou'cver, the irttcrcst for Lhe pt-ioc1 of delay, it an1', is forfeitcci. 'l'he respondcnts .rre directed [.) de 1]osit Lhe compensation rrlno'.illL u'ilir accrutcd inL('rcsL rvithin .r pertod of tu'o months from thc clate o1- receipt of a co[)y of this , L],lonlent afller deducting the arnount if anf i'rlreadl' dt:posited. Or ;uch deposit, thc cl:rimanls arc cr-ttitlccl to rvithdrau' the said :trrli)unt v"ilholtt furnr shing any sccuriLv. Miscellatreous pctitions, penclirtg tl an1', in th -" lppeal, shall stand closcd. ISD/- MOHD.ISMAIL t)E:PUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// IiECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Chairman, [/'lotor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Prirr; pal District Judge, Nalgonda.

2. on; cc to SRI ANNAPURNA SREERAM, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRI. SANJAY K SINGH, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies GE/PSL hfi. i3.r:rrJ-4-?!e<€1*j.'^1=+-iraie.:!ie_4a!e!iifj?EEE{E !!ElEgIE!*s:'u :ii'rr::slzg-'Gar4i@lEry3rEgl'lE@:In , HIGH COURT DATED:18/07/2025 JUDGEMENT MACMA.No.457 ot 2021 ].iATEi o \, .ti) i,J i .?^ t -t- "I ,- ,\_rJi t? i\i'l flft 'r .4:) PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS 1 1 \l il IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD 134441 FRIDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 457 OF 2021 Between:

1. Daarla Veeramma, W/o. Late Saidulu, Age 31 years,

2. Daarla Anusha, Dio. Late Saidulu. Age16 years. Occ Student

3. Daarla Balu, S/o. Late Sardulu, Age 12 years, Occ Student (Appellants No. 2 and 3 being minors Rep. by rts their Natural guardian and mother Appellant No.1) All are N/o. Ananthagirr Village and Mandal, Suryapet Revenue District, R/o.Gandhi Nagar locality of Nalgonda Town. ...APPELLANTS/CLAIMANTS AND

1. Maroju Venkateswarlu , Venkata Chary, S/o. Rangaiah, Age 58 years, Occ Busiriess, R/o. lndira Nagar H/o. Madavaram (V), Munagala lrlandal.

2. Yelka Bindu, Wo. Narender Reddy. Age 30 years, Occ Owner of Motorcycle No. TS 29A 0266, R/o lndira Nagir, HJo. Madavaram (V) t\/unagala Mandal, Suryapet District.

3. The New lndia Assurance Co., Ltd, Sangamitra Co-op. Urban Bank Complex, Prakasham Bazar, Nalgonda Town. (Policy No. 61320331 150300004855, valid from 22-03-2016 to 21-03-2017) ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Appeal filed under Section 173 of tvlotor Vehicle Act, against the Order and Decree dated 09.02.202'1 passed in M.V.O.P No. 329 of 2017 by the court of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal -Cum- Prl. District Judge, Nalgonda- This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perLrs I-rJ the grounds of appeal, the judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and th l rnaterial papers in the case and upon hearing the arguments of Smt. Annapurn:r lireeram, Advocate for the Appellant and none appeared for the Respondent No.1 ri il and Sri Sanjay K. Singh, Advocate appeared Respondent No.3. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

1. That the Motcr Accident Civil [/liscellaneus Appeal b: and is hereby partly a llowed .

2. That the compensation be and is hereby enhancing f crn Rs 7,91,8001 to Rs 1615,100/-

3. That the rate of interest is reduced from 12a/o to 7.591' p()T annum from the date of claim petition till realization, and the interest for ht: pe,'iod of delay, if any, is forferted.

4. That the respondents be and are hereby dire: e:i t: deposit the compensation amount with accrued interest within a p eriod of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgmenl ,: fter deducting the amount if any already deposited. On such deposit, the ;ii: imants are entitled to withdraw the said amount without furnishing any secu it1,.

5. That there shall be no order as to costs in thrs appeal lff rue Copyll !iD/- MOHO.TSMAtL DEPUTY REGISTRAR \ SiECTION OFFICER To

1. The Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Pr ncil>al Distnct Judge, Nalgonda 2 Two CD Copies. GE/PSL HIGH COURT DATED:18/0712025 DECREE MACMA.No.457 of 2O21 PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTIJ ,)0 t1 )