The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Appellants: SRI P.S.P.SURESH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI SANJAY K.SINGH Counsel for the Respondent No.1&2: None Appeared The Court made the following: JUDGMENT ':,.: r,\ i(r THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA M.A.C.M.A.No.2O77 of 20L9 JUDGMENT:

1. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Principal District Judge, Nalgonda (for short, "the Tribunal"), in M.V.O.P-No.546 of 2016, dated 3O.O7.2018, the petitioners in the said O.P. preferred the present Appeal seeking enhancement of compensation amount.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter are referred as they were arrayed before the learned Tribunal.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioners, who are the wife, sons, mother and father of late Sathyanarayana Reddy (hereinafter referred as 'the deceased') filed a petition under Section ioo of the Motor vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation o[ Rs.15,O0,000/-, on account of the death of the deceased in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on L6.O7.2016. It is stated by the petitioners that on 16.07.2016 at about 02:oo P.M., when the deceased was riding the said motorcycle in a normal speed on left side o'[.the road by following traffic rules, on the way the deceased reached near police station of Mothey viltage and. mandal of Nalgonda Distict, then one cement tanker lorry bearing No.AP-24- TB-O8-29 which was driven by the l't respondent in a rash and \ \ 2 NBK,J MACMA.No.2077 of 2019 negligent manner and dashed to the vehicle in which the deceased was trauelling. As a result, the deceased sustained head injury, fracture of left leg, grievous in abdomen, pelvis and other multiple injuries and flractures all over the body. Immediately, after the acciden -, the deceased was shifted to Government Area Hospital at Suryape:t a.nd admitted as in-patient and while undergoing treatment, he died on the same day at about 03:00 P.M.

4. It is stated by the petitioners thatas on the date o[accident, the deceased was aged 30 years and used to attend electrician works end agricultural works and used to earn Rs.2,2O,000/- per annum. Due to the sudden death of the deceased, the petitioners lost their s<>le bread winner and became destitute and hence filed claim p,ltition seeking compensation against the respondents.

5. Respr>ndent Nos. | & 2, who are the driver and owner of the crime vehicle i.e., Cement Tanker lorry bearing No.AP-24-TB-O8-29 remainr:d ex-parte.

6. Respondent No.3/New India Assurance Company hled its counter denying the place and. date of the accident, the registration of the ,:rime vehicle by Mothey Police Station, the relationship of the pelitioners with the deceased, the age and earnings of the deceas<:d, his contrilution to the family, and the insurance coverag:e of the crime vehicle with the third respondent. It also ,41 3 NBK,J MACMA.No.2077 of 2019 alleged violation of driving conditions, issues with the license particulars, and non-compliance with the terms of the petition. The respondent No.3 denied the claim as excessive and ultimately sought its dismissal.

7. Based on the pleadings made by both parties, the learned Tribunal had framed the following issues:- (t) Whetlrcr the deceqsed died in the road accident occurred on 16.07.2016 at about 02:OO P.M., near police station, Mothey Village and Manda[ Nalgonda Di.strict due to the rash and negligent driuing of the driuer of the cement Tanker LooA bearing No.AP-2 4-TB-082 9? (ii) Whether the petitioners are entitled for any compensation, if so from uthom and to what amount? (iii) To wh.at retieft .8. During the course of trial before the Tribunal, on behalf of the petitioners, PWs.l to 4 were examined and Exs-Al to A7 were marked. On behalf of the respondents, no oral evidence was adduced.

9. After considering the entire evidence and documents available on record, the learned Tribunal had part$ allowed the claim petition byrawarding gompensation of Rs.9,88,000/- along with interest @ 7%o per annum from the date of filling of the petition till the date of award and subsequent interest @ \- \ 4 NBK,J MACMA.No.2077 of 2019 Ii 60/o per annum from the date of award till the date of realiza',.ion payable by respondent Nos.l to 3 jointly and severally. Aggrieved by the same, the claim petitioners preferr:d the present Appeal.

10. I{eard both sides 1 1. The contentions of the learned counsel for the appellants are that the learned Tribunal failed to consider the fact that the deceased was an agriculturalist. The Tribunal also failed to appreciate that the appellants are the wife, minor children, and aged parents of the deceased., who were dependent on him. It is further contended that the Tribunal erred in not granting future prospects to the income of the deceased. Therefore, it is prayed that the appeal be allowed by enhancing the compensation. L2. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents contended that the learned Tribunal, after considering all the aspect:;, had awarded reasonable compensation for which interfe:'ence of this Court is unwarranted.

13. Now the point that arises for determination is, t' Whether the order passed bg the leamed Trtbunal requires interferene of this Court? r') 5 NBK,I luIACIvtA. No.2 O 7 7 of 2 0 1 9 POINT:- 14. Since there is no dispute about the occurrence of accident and death of the deceased, this court is not inclined to discuss the said aspects. Hence, this court is not inclined to interfere with the said finding. The only point that has to be discussed in the present Appeal is with regard to enhancement of compensation.

15. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the learned Tribunal failed to award future prospects to the established income of the deceased and therefore prayed for enhancement of compensation amount. i6. Since the deceased used to do agricultural work apart from working as electrician, the Tribunal has rightly taken the monthly incorne of the deceased as Rs.6,000/- and the same needs no interference by this court. However, a perusal of the impugned judgment shows that the learned rribunal failed to award future prospects to the income of the deceased. Hence, this court, by relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Nationq'l Insurance Compang Li,mited Vs. pranag Sethi 1 , is inclined to add 40% i.e., 2,4OO/- (Rs.6,O00/- x 4Oo/o) towards future prospects to the income of the deceased for the deceased being 30 years and is an electrician and agricultural worker. After 'zotlacl zzoo \ I .tt I 6 NBK,J MACMA.No.2077 of 2019 f-l; additior of the same, the net future monthly income of the deceaseC c()mes to Rs.8,4OOl-. Since the number of dependants being fi,re, it. ll4tn amount is deducted towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, then his net monthly income comes to Rs.rc,3O)/- [Rs.S,4OO (Rs.8,4OOxLla\ and after applying multiplier '17' for the deceased being 30 years at the time of accidenL, then the total loss of dependency on account of the death of the d:ceased would come to Rs. 12,85,2007-ln".O,SO O x 12 x l7l. Apart from this, the petitioners are aiso entitled for Rs.36,300/- towards loss of estate and funeral expenses as per the judgment of the Hcrn'ble Supreme Court in Pranag Sethi (1 supra); Rs. 10,0C0/ - towards transportation and Rs.2,42,OOO I - (Rs.48,2-QO I - each to the petitioners) towards loss of consortium as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Magma General Insuro:nce Colnpang Limited. a. Nanu Rann @ Chuhttt Rc;m and others2. Thus in all, the appeliants are entitled for a total cornpensation of Rs. L5,73,5OO l-- L7. Irr view of the judgments of the Apex Court in Laxman @ La-xman Mourya Vs. Diuisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Compang Linited and. anothef , the Apex Court while referring {(zors) r8 scc l30 3lzorr; to scc 756 I NBK,J MACMA.No.2O77 of 2019 to Nagappd. Vs. Gurttdagal Singha wherein the Apex Court held that the claimants are entitled to get more amount than what has been claimed. Further, the Motor Vehicles Act being a beneficial piece of legislation, where thc interest of the claimants is a paramount consijeration the Courts should always endeavour to extend the benefit to the claimants to a just and reasonable extent.

18. In the result, M.A.C.M. A.No.2O77 of 2Ol9 is allowed by enhancing the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.9,88,000/- to Rs.15,73,500/- which shatl carry interest at the rate of 60/o p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization payable by respondent Nos.1 to 3 jointly and severally as held by the Tribunal. The respondents 1 to 3 are directed to deposit the entire compensation within a period of one month from, the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Upon such deposit, the appellants are en'titled to withdraw the same as per the apportionment made by the learned Tribunal. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shalfstand closed SD/- A.SREENIVASA REDDY STANT REGISTRAR ,/TRUE COPY// TION OFFICER To,

1. The Chairman Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims bunal -cum- Principal 2 3 District Judge at Nalgonda. One CC to SRI P.S.P.SURESH KUMAR Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRI SANJAY K.SINGH, Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies KFVnvb f i i.'* .) () 1-1 0 5 t{fifi ?[2[ -t\ HIGH COIJRT DATED iOl10712025 JUDGMENT+DECREE MACMA.No.2077 of 2019 ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS t p il, IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA [ 3300 I 6'.ttl Between

1. Kaaki Vijaya, wo Late satyanarayana Reddy, Age 30 years,0cc:House hold.

2. Kaki_Ka,rthik Reddy, s/o. Late satyanarayana Reddy, Age 07 years, occ:Student

3. Kaki-Aravinda Reddy, S/o. Late Satyanarayana Reddy, Age 10 years, 0cc:Student.

4. Kaki Pulamma, wo Krishna Reddy, Age 55 years, occ:House hold. 5. Kaki Krishna Reddy Late Sathi Reddy, Age:62 Years, Occ: NiL, the petitioner No.2 and 3 being minors rep by its-their. natural Mother 6u*- Guardian Namely Kaki Vijayra eho is cldimdnt in Appeal. , -S/o. AII are tr/odhinpuram villag-e of Chivvemula Mandal, Presenfly residing at pangal locality of Nalgonda Town and District. ... Petitioner/Appel lant , :..:" :, AND

1. G.Ravinder,...s/o Q.-sgvanna age-2g years, occ- Driver, R/o. H.No.4-6g, Kothlabad village of Kailkonda Mahdal; Mahabubnager. Dishict,

2. Q^e-egu Transport,_le!_by its Manager, (N. Ram Mohan Rao, R/o. D.No. 405213, Behind, APSEB Sub stationl eaini Kotewhwar Rao street, Kodad Town and Manadal, Nalgonda District. (owner of the Tankar bearing No.Api+ TB 0829)

3. New lndia Assurance company. Ltd,_ rep by its, / Divisional Manager, Pivisional office, .{9 ganghariritra Bank compiex, prakasham eiZar, Nalgonda Town and District - Res pondents/Responde nts Appeat fited under section 173 or u.v.nct,'a;il;; ilrnl oro"r rno decree made in M.V.O.P.No.546 of 2016 dated 30.07.2018 on the file of the court of the Chairman Motor Vehicte Accidents Claims Tribunaf -cum- Principal District Judge at Nalgonda. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the judrlment and Decree of the Lower Court and the material papers in ' the case and upon hearing the argument of Sri P.S.P.Suresh Kumar, Advocate for the Appellant ard of Sri Sanjay K.Singh, Advocate for the Respondent No.3, and None appeared for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

1. That the Vlotor Accident Civil tr/iscellaneous Appeal be and hereby is allowed. 2. That the lompensation amount awarded by the Tribunalfrom Rs.9,88,000/- to Rs.15,73,500/- which shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petitiorr till the date of realization payable by respondent Nos.1 to 3 jointly and severally as'held by the Tribunal.

3. That the respondent No.1 to 3 be and hereby directed to depost the entire compensation within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment

4. That on :iuch deposit, the appellants are entitled to withdraw the sme as per the appo(ionment made by the Tribunal.

5. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. SD/. A.SREENIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Cherirman Motor Vehicle Accidents Clai MS ribunal -cum- Principal District Judge at Nalgonda

2. Two CD Copies KH/nvb / / HIGH COURT DATED:01 10712025 ( * lrlE S 0 5 l{AH 2[7fi * DECREE MACMA.No.2077 of 2019 ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS q ')/