As per the guidelines of the Hon'ble Apex Court in dictum of Sarla Verrna v. Delhi Transport Corporqtion,r if the deceased was married, I l

5. Baby T.Rishta, Dio.late T.Srinivas, Occ: Student R4and5 are rep by their natural mother and guardian R3 Rl/o.Plot No.18, Road No.1, Prasanthi Hills, Meerpet, Hyderabad - 500 079. counser for the Appefiants: M/S. p Vinayaka ,*rrr*"t*ndents/Respondents Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : Sri C Vikram Chandra Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : Sri Rajanikanth Jwala The Court delivered the following: Judgment THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SRIJ E SUDHA M.A.C.M.A.No.2 389 of2OO8 JUDGMENT: Thrs appc:rl is filed againsl the Order dated I i o4 '2OO8 in O.P.No-227 ol 2OO7 passed by the III Additionirl llhicf Judge Citv Civil CoLtrt at Flyderabad.

2. The a 1r pellan ts / pe litioners f rted O.P.No. )2 / ttl 2OO7, clairning coml)ensation of Rs. 13,O0,O00/- for the lcath ol the dcccascd, 'l'.Srir-rivas in the road trafhc accidenl )ccurred on

20.12.2004.

3. Tl'rc Triirl Court conside.ing the oral an<l ocLllncnt ar!' cvidence grttntcd Rs. i6,58,80O/ - as there was :rontrr but ory ncglige nc'e on his part and thus a'"varded Rs.S,ll' ,400/- with intcre st Qi\ 7 .51'/L' per annum from the date of pct it i rn to till the datc of dcposit.

4. 'l'hc lt-'arned Counsel for lhe appellalrt ;,/ pt'titioners contenclcd tl)irt the accident took placc due to grr,r s nr-'gligence on lhe part of the driver of the mini bus ant l here is no contritlutory ncgligcnce on the part of the d<'t t ,r scrl in the accidcnt. Tlrt' compensation qranted by the t - al Court is rncagrc. Tht'rr:fore, requested thc Court to modil" thc order of lhe lrial Court. I )

5. Learned counsel [urther contends that the age of the deceased was 35 years and he rvas working as U.D.C in Superintending Enginecr's Office, P.W. D, Circle-[, Hydcrabad and was earning Rs.9,982/ pcr month and the tri:rl Court taken his incomc as Rs.9,9O0/- per month. There is contributory negligence on part ol the deceased, evidence of eye witness was not considered properly. Therefore, requestcd the Court to modify the award of the trial Court.

6. It is for the insurance cornpany to pleerd and prove contributory negligence, but they lailed to do so, as such linality of contributory negligence on the part of the dcceasecl is set aside.

7. Petitioners deposed that thc deceased was working he was working as U.D.C in Supcrintcnding Engineer's Off-rce, P.W.D, Circle l, Hyderabad and was earning Rs.9,982/ pcr month and the trial Court taken his incomc as Rs.9,900/- per month. This Court finds it reasonable to take his income as Rs.9,900/- per month.

8. As per the guidelines of the Hon'ble Apex Court in dictum of Sarla Verrna Vs. Delhi Transport Corporqtion,r if the deceased was married, I l4th of his income has to be dcducted ' (roo9) 6 s( c t2 t 3 as there are 5 dependants towards his personal exlr nses. Thus, the annual income of the deceased after deduc l -rg personal expenses comrs Lo Rs.89,l0O/- per annum anct the Hon'ble Apex Court in the dictum of National Insuranc z Compang Limited Vs. Pranag SethP, held that the future rrospects of incomc of the se Ii employed deceased shall also be included in detcrmination of the compensation. Thus, considt :ing the age of the deccased, Sonl, of the income has to be a I led towards future prospects and thus the amount \ r()' Lld become Rs. 1,33,650/ This sum if multiplied with t.t : multiplier applic:rble to thc age of the deceased i.e. 15, it u'c rld come to Rs.2O,O4,7.50/-. Thus, the appcllants/ petitioners rr e entitlecl to Rs.20,04,750/ under the head 'Loss of Dependencl

9. Bcsides, the appcllants are also entitled for I 'mpensation under 'conventional heads' as prescribed in t1r dictum of Noltional Insurance Compang Limited Vs. Pran,z y Sethi, i.e ., Rs.15,O0O/- lo,,r'ards loss of Estate and Rs.15,0( )/- towards fnncral chargcs.

10. Further, the I'{on'ble Supreme Court, by r e tcrerling thc comprehensive interpretation of 'consortium' 13 ven in the authority ol Magma General Insurance Compang Limited us. : (:o r) to scc o8o .4 Nd.nu Rrrlm Alias Chuhru Ra,m & others:, and in the authority between United India Insurrrnce Cornpang Limited us. Satinder Kqur (a) Satwinder Kaur and. other{, forLified that the amounts for loss of consortium shall be awarded to the children who lose the care and protection of their parents as 'parental consortium'and to the parents as, 'filial consortium' for the loss of their grown-up children, to compensate thcir agonv, Iove and affection, czrre --rnd companionship of deceased children. Accordingly, it is jl-lst and reasonable to ar.l,ard Rs.8O,OOO/- as hlial consortium, Rs.80,00O/ tonards parental consortium and Rs.4O,000/ towards spousal consortium to thc petitioners.

11. Therefore, the appellan Ls / letitioners are cntitleC for the compensation in the following terms: 1 2 3 4 Loss of dependency Conventional Heads F ilial Consortiurn Parental Consortium Spousal Consortium Rs.2O,O4,750 I Rs.30,OO0/ Rs.80,000/ Rs.80,0o0/ - Rs.4O,OO0/ TOTAL Rs.22,34,75O1- 72- In the result, the appeal is allowed by enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.8,29 ,4OO / - to Rs.22,34,7 50 / - r (2013) r8 SCC [0 ' (2olo) 9 scc 6l.r ,// 5 (Rupees Tu'enty '[wo Lakhs Thirty Four Thr r sand Sr:ven Hundred ancl Fifty onlv) r,,,ith tnterest at the r€rtc of 7 .5o/o per annum kom the d.rtc ol' filing thc petition till dzLtt ,f realization. Respondent Nos. I an<l 2 shall deposit the cn ire amount within a pc'riocl ol'onc month from the date ,.r order. On such Deposit, the petitioners are permitte<l o withdraw Rs.2 lakh cach, respondent Nos.4 and 5 ar,' ,t:rmitterl to vr.ithclrar.r, Rs.l [:r[<h each arrd the respondent Io.3. u,i[e of the deccasccl is entitlccl to u'ithdra',v the balrL rce amount u'i[h ir-rterest. The appcllants/ pe[itioners at-r: directed to pay the deficit court lcc on the enhancecl alnr r-rnt. There shall bc no orrler irs to costs- Miscellancous pctitions pending, if anr', sha ll s land closed. SD/. N SRIHARI, C EPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ::7 SECTION OFFICER To, 1- The Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-lll a lditional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad(With records, if any) 2. One CC to M/S. P VINAYAKA SWAMY, Advocate [Oetrr ;1 3. One CC to SRI RAJANIKANTH JWALA, Advocate [OptJ )] 4. One CC to SRI C VIKRAM CHANDRA, Advocate [OpUl 5. Two CD Copies & ADK * A,',# HIGH COURT DATED: 2210412025 JUDGMENT+DECREE (- STAIE MACMA.No.2389 of 2008 :) I l[\ rst o c:) .1 ?? ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS @,1 aA )b tN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA' MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APP EAL NO: 2389 OF 2008 Between:

1. MR.T.V.Chalapathi Naidu, S/o.Jayaram Setty, Occ: Retd Govt Servant Rl/o.Flat No.108, Anuradha Sadan Apartments, Adikmet, Hyderabad.

2.Smt.t.Satyavathi, W/o-Mr.T.V.Chalapathi Naidu, Occ: Housewife Fl/o.Flat No.108, Anuradha Sadan Apartments, Adikmet, Hyderabad. ...Appellants/Petitioners AND 1. Briliant Grammar School, rep by its Conespondent K.Narayana Reddy O/o.Dilshuknagar, Hyderabad. 2. Khader Jhan, S/o.Suleman Khan, Occ: Driver R/o.1-4-505, Musheerabad, Hyderabad.

3. Smt.Lavannaya, W/o.late T.Srinivas, Occ: Housewife Rl/o.Plot No.18, Road No.1, Prasanthi Hills, lvleerpet, Hyderabad - 500 079.

4. Master T.Rushikesh, S/o.late T.Srinivas, Occ: Student R:/o.Plot No.'18, Road No.1, Prasanthi Hills, Meerpet, Hyderabad - 500 079. 5. Baby T.Rishta, D/o.late T.Srinivas, Occ: Student R4and5 are rep by their natural mother and guardian R3 Rl/o.Plot No.18, Road No.1, Prasanthi Hills, Meerpet, Hyderabad - 500 079. ...Respondents/Respondents Appeal filed Under Section .173 of Motor Vehicles Act,1988 against the Order and decree in lvl.V.O-P.No.227 of 2007 dated.23-04-2008 on the file of the Court of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-lll Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and the material papers in the Case and upon hearing the arguments of M/S. P Vinayaka Swamy, Advocate for the Appellants and of Sri C Vikram Chandra, Advocate for the Respondent No.1 and Sri Rajanikanth Jwala for the respondent No-2. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows: 1 That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and hereby is allowed by enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.8,29,400/- to Rs.22,34,750/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lakhs Thirty Four Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty 7 only) with interest at the rate of 7.5o/o per annum frorr the date of filing the petition till date of realization;

2. That the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 shall deposit the e rtire amount within a period of one month from the date of order;

3. That on such Deposit, the petitioners are permitted t r withdiaw Rs.2 lakh cach, respondent Nos.4 and 5 are permitted to withdril v Rs.l lakh each and the respondent No.3, wife of the deceased is entitled t: withdraw the balance amount with interest;

4. That the appellants/petitioners are directed to pay the c eficit court fee on the enhanced amount;

5. That save as aforesaid, the Judgment and decree of tr Tribunal shall stands confirmed in all other respects; and

6. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. SD/. N SRIHARI, E EPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// l- SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-lll a Jditional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad

2. Two CD Copies ADK W HIGH COURT DATED: 2210412025 I I DECREE MACMA.No.2389 of 2008 ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS 10- )A ,t,