The High Court · 2025

2. The Oriental lnsurance Company Ltd., Represented by its Brancfi Manager, Sri Sai Balaji Towers, Axis Bank Upstirs, Rabhur Road, Mahabubnagar.

3. M. Matreshwaram, S/o.Ankayaiah,Age. Bl pars, Occ. Labour, Guvalanipally Mllage, Uppunuthalapally Mandal, at present residing at H.No.1-3-'151y'G, Rajendranagar, Mahabubnagar District

4. M. Laxmamma, Wo.M. Maheshwaram, Age. 73 Years, Occ. Housetpld, Guvalanipally Village, Uppunuthalapally Mandal, at present reskling at H.No.1-3-1 51lG, Raiendranagar, Mahabubnagar District. (Respondents No.3 and 4 herein are made only a proforma parties to this appeal. Hence, no notice is necessary to them. ...RES,ONDENTS Counsel for the Appellants 1, 4 to 6 : SRl. K VENKATESH GUPTA Counsel for the Respondent No.l: : - Counsel for the Rr:spondent No.2 : V VENKATARAMI REDDY Counsel for the Rr:spondent No.3 & 4 : The Court made the following: JUDGiIENT THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA M.A.C.M.A.No.585 of 2023 JUDGMENT: Heard Sri K. Venkatesh Gupta, learned counsel for tJle appellants/claimant Nos. 1, 4 to 6 and Sri V.Venkatarami Reddy, learned standing counsel for respondent No.2/Insurance Company. Perused the entire record.

2. This is an appea-l preferred by the appellants/claimants aggrieved by the compensation awarded by the learned Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Il Additional District Judge (FTC), Mahabubnagar, (for short the Tribunal') O.P.No.9O of 2012, dated 03.O4.2014.

3. The appellants/claimants Iiled the claim petition seeking compensation of Rs. 15,OO,OOO/- with interest from the respondenfs jointly and severally on account of death of one Skylab in a road trallic accident. On 2O.LL.2OL1, in the morning, the deceased persons Palepu Buchi Ramulu and Slrylab, were proceeding on Hero Honda Motor cycle bearing No.AP 22 BB 1527 to attend ttre marriage of tlreir friend. When they reached Mannanoor Village, at about 5:3O p.m., the driver of the lorry bearing No.AP 12 T 4155 I his driven the lorry in high speed in a rash and negligent manner z RYJ MA.C.MA.No.S85 of 2O23 and dashed ttre motorcycle, which resulted in death of the Palepu Buchi Ramuh-r and Skytab. In these circumstances, the claim petition is file'd by the family members of the deceased Skylab seeking compensation.

4. The clairnants got exarnined PWs. 1 and 2 and got marked Exs.Alto A).2. Respontlent No.2 got marked Ex.Fll copy of Motor Insurance Cerl.Lhcate-cum-Policy Schedule.

5. The Tribr-rnal having examined the oral ernd documentaqr evidence, awarrled compensation of Rs. 14,80,000,t - with interest at

7.5o/o per annrlm. Aggrieved by tJ:e said order and decree, the present appeal is preferred.

6. In groun,ls of appeal, the claimants cont.ended that the Tribunal erred :n taking the net monthly income ot: the deceased for compuiing con:.pensation and that loss of spousal consortium to wife, filial consortium to parents are not awarded.

7. During a,:guments in appeal, emphasis is made ttrat the Tribunal comrrritted an error by considering tle net income of the deceased, instr:ad of gross incorne, while computing compensation towards loss ol' dependency. With respect to futu.re prospects, the I 3 RY,J M. A.C. N. A. No. 585 oJ 2023 sarne were not awardd during the year, 2O14 when the Tribunal passed the award. a. The counsel for respondent No.2 argued that the Tribunal has passed an award, which is just and reasonable and that taking the monthly income on the basis of salarSr certificate is justihed.

9. Having regard to the rival contentions, as per Ex.All salary certificate, the gross income of tl're deceased is Rs. 10,459/-, out of which, Professional Tax has to be deducted for Rs. 100/- and thus, the monthly income would be Rs. 10,359/-.

10. To quantiS the compensation towards loss of dependency, as per judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and others', future prospects are taken at SOVo i.e., Rs.5179/- is added to the monthly income, the net monthly income comes to Rs.15,538/- (Rs.1O,359/- + Rs.S,179/-). There are four (4) dependants on the deceased and Y+& of the income has to be deducted towards personal expenses. From the net annual income of Rs.1,86,456/- (Rs.15,538x12), if /+ft of tire income is deducted towards personal expenses, tJ:e annual contribution of the deceased to the claimants would be Rs.1,39,842/-. For a person aged 32 years, as per the judgment of 1 '(zob) re scc oao 4 RYJ M -A..C. M.A. N o. 58s of 2023 Smt. Sarla Varma !vs. Delhi Transport Corporatioa', the multiplier wotrld be '16'. Thus, the total compensation under the head of 'loss of dependency' would be Rls.22,37,4721- (Rs.1,39,842 l- x 16l instead of Rs.14,8O,OO0/- awarded by the Tribunal.

11. The T?ibunal has awarded Rs.1O,OO0/- towards fi.rneral expenses and Rs. 1O,OO0/- towards loss of estate and Rs.2O,OOO/- towards consor.tium to, claimalt No. 1. However, in view of National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and others', the said finding is set aside a:rd the claimants are granted Rs.33,(XX),/- towards funeral expenses and loss of estate. Further, granted Rs.44,OOO/- to claimant No.1 towards spousal consortium, Rs..+4,OOO / - each to claimant Nos.4- to 6 towards parental consortium. Thus, in all the claimants are awarded Rs,24,6,472 1 -. L2. [n the rr:sult, the Appeal is allowed by enhancing tle compensation arnount awarded by the Tribunal from Rs. 14,8O,OOO/. to Rs.24,46,4721-, which shall carry interest @ 9o/o per annllrn on the enhanced compensation. However, the claimants shall pay the deficit Court Fee on the enhanced compensation. The Respondent Nos. I to 4 shall pay the I '(zoog) e s.c.c. rzr tlzorl esccazo 5 RY,J M.A.C. M.A. No. sas ol 2o2s compensation within a period of fwo months from the date of receipt of tJlis order. Upon such paJrment made, ttre clairrr petitioner Nos. I and 4 are entitled to withdraw tlle entke amount in proportion to their shares as awarded by the Tribunal without furnishing any security. However, the claimant petitioner Nos.S and 6 are entitled to withdraw their apportioned amount after attaining majority. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this appeal, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. \ SD/- MOHD.ISMAIL PUTY REGISTRAR \ \r t, J. i CTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, Mahabubnagar.

1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal -Cum- ll Addl. District Judge (FTC) At 2. One CC to SRl. K VENKATESH GUPTA Advocate {OPUCI 3. One CC to SRl. V VENKATARAMI REDDY Advocate [OPUC] 4. Turc CD Copies GE/PSL W HIGH COURT OATEO:171071202! I JUDGMENT MACMA.No.S85 o1 2023 __.:' 16 Eu 2w \,.'s., ALLOWNG THE I\,IACMA WITHOUT COSTS %*