1. Gayethula Hanmadlu v. 1. A. Venkata Subbaiah

Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SMT. SWATHI GUPTA The Court made the following: JUDGMENT THE HON'BLE SMT. JIISTICE RENUKA YARA 1 JIIDGMENT: Heard sri Kuldeep Jadav, learned counsel for the appellants/claimants and sri M. Rama Krishna, learned standing counsel for respondent No.3/Insurance Company' Perused the entire record-

2. This is an appeal preferred by the appellants/claimants aggrieved by the compensation awarded by the learned chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Pr1. District Judge at Jagtial (for short .tt.e Tribunau in M.v.o.P.No.1OO of 2018, dated

08.03.2023.

3. The appellants/claimants filed tl.e claim petition due to death of one Gayethula Sathyamma in a road traffic accident which occurred on 06.o l.2ol7 at 6 pm opposite to RRR hotel on Chittoor- Tirupathi road of Andhra Pradesh State. on o3-ol.2ol7, the claimant No.l and the d.eceased proceeded to Tirumala in Bolero bearing No.AP-15-88-4644 to have darshan of Lord Sri Balaji' on 06.0 l.2ot7, while rehrrning, when they reached RRR hotel, they stopped the Bolero vehicle to have tea. The deceased was crossing the road. by walk to reach Bolero vehicle, at that time, one Bharath 2 -A: Gas lorr5r bearing No.AP-O3-TC-8852 driven in rash and negligent manner with high speed came from Timpathi side and dashed the deceased causing her to fall on road and right side back wheel ran over left knee of the deceased. As a result, the deceased sustained crush injury and multiple injuries atl over tJle body and fell unconscious. The deceased was taken to SVRRGG hospital, Tirupathi where she was declared dead. Following tltis accident, the claimants filed claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.1O,OO,OOO/- with interest payable by respondent Nos.l to 3 jointly and severally.

4. The claimants lead evidence by exarnining PWs 1 and 2 and got marked Exs.Pl to P7. Respondent No.3 got examined RWl and got marked Exs.R1 to R4.

5. Upon examining the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.5,52,8OOl- with interest at

7.5o/o per a.nnum to claimant No.l alone while dismissing the claim of claimant Nos.2 to 4. The respondent Nos.l and 2 were directed to pay the said compensation jointly and severally and exonerated respondent No.3 from liability. Aggrieved by the said order and decree, the present appeal is preferred. : _..-.i:Ira?rt.ae :_.:ir._itJl:4ili+:]i,, I 1 3

6. In grounds of appeal, the claimalts contended that the Tribunal has not granted reasonable amount as compensation and that l/+u of the income has to be deducted towards personal expenses for assessing loss of dependency but the Tribunal has deducted l/Z,a though the dependants are four (4) in number. Further, it is contended that the Tribunal ought to have fastened hebility to respondent No.3 as well or in the alternative ordered pay and recovery.

7. As per record, there is no dispute about the occurrence of accident and the same occurring due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1 who was driving the Bharath Gas lorry bearing No.AP-03-TC-8852.

8. Coming to the aspect of quantum of compensation, the deceased is claimed to be 57 years as on the date of accident and had income of Rs.lO,ooo/- per month. since there can be no evidence about income of an agricultr:re labourer or house wife, the notional income taken at Rs.6,OOOl- per month by the Tribunal seems to appropriate. Further, for a person aged below 6O years, as per judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and others', if future lzorz) 1G scc G8o I I I I I I I I j : i i I 4 -+" prospects at 1O%o i.e., Rs.6OO /- is added to the monthly income, tJre net monthly income comes to Rs.6,600l- (Rs.6,0OO/- + Rs.600/-). There are four (4) dependants on the deceased and L/4tr of the income has to be deducted towards personal e>rpenses. From the net annual income of Rs.79,2OO / - (Rs.6,6OOx12), if L /+tt of the income is deducted towards personal elq)enses, the annual contribution of the deceased to the clairnants would be Rs.59,4OO/-. For a person aged from 56 to 6O years as per the judgment of Smt. Sarla Varma vrs. Delhi Transpott Corporation2, the multiplier would be 9'. Thus, the total compensation under tlre head of 'loss of dependency' would be Rs.5r34, @Ot- (Rs.59,400 x 9).

9. In addition, the claimants are entifled to pa5nnent of Rs.33rOOO/- towards funeral expenses and loss of estate. F\rrttrer, claimant No.l is granted Rs.44rO(X)/- towards loss of spousal consortium and claimant Nos.2 to 4 are granted Rs.44,0O0/- each towards parental consortium. Thus, in all the claimants are awarded Rs.7,43, 6ol() I -.

10. Coming to the aspect of liability to pay the compensation, respondent No.3 examined Rwl to establish that there was 21zoos)6 s.c.c. 121 5 violation of tenns and conditions of the insurance policy on account of handing over tl:e vehicle to a person without driving license. However, in the cross exalnination, RWl admitted that Ex.Rl Insurance policy was in force which is a package policy. Since there was a valid insurance policy in force as on the date of accident, respondent No.3 has to pay the compensation at first instance and recover the same from respondent Nos.l and 2 as per the legal ratio taid down in Natioaal Insurance Company Ltd. v. Swaran Singh and otherss. \ 1 1. The Tribunal has awarded the comPensation amount to claimant No.1 only while dismissing the claim of claimant Nos.2 to

4. Since, claimant Nos.2 to 4 being the daughters of deceased, they are entitled to be awarded compensation. Thrrs, claimant No.l being husband of deceased, is awarded Rs.4,43,6OO I - and appeltant Nos.2 to 4, being major daughters 9f tl:e deceased are ! :( awarded an arnount of Rs.l,OO,OOO/- each.

12. In the result, the Appeal is allowed in part by enhancing the compensation amount awarded by tlle Tribunat from Rs.5,52,8OO/- to Rs.7,43,6OO/-, which shall carry interest @ 7.5o/o per annum. The Respondent No.3 / tnsurance comparry shall pay the '1zoo+; 3 scc 297 6 +. compensation in the first instance within a period of two mcinths from the date of receipt of this order and later recover the same from the respondent Nos.l and 2. Upon such pa5rment made, the claim petitioners are entitled to withdraw the entire amount in proportion to their shares as indicated above without furnishing arry security. 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/. SRI M. OSMAN ALI BAIG ASSISTANT REGISTRAR6 SECTION OFFICER ,/TRUE COPY/ To,

1. The Chairman, MACT-cum-Principal District Judge, Jagtial. 2. One CC to SRI KULDEEP JADHAV Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to SMT SWATHI GUPTA Advocate [OPUCI 4. Two CD Copies GR s HIGH COURT DATED i0910712025 / JUDGMENT MACMA.No.911 of 2023 O O t * THE S 1 2 0E[ 2025 ,.' Cirf,l PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS v ..l IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA Between:

1. Gayethula Hanmadlu, S/o. Mallaiah, Age. 60 years, Caste. Munnurukap-u, Oc6. Agriculture, R/o.Lyagalamarri Village of Pegadapalli MaMal of Jagitial District.

2. Rachakonda Shoba, Wo.Mohan, Age. 40 years, Caste. Munnurukapu, Occ. Household, Rl/o. Kichulatapalle V/o. Pegadapalli Mandal of Jagitial District, 3. Gayethula Kishan, S/o. Hanmandlu, Age. 38_years, Caste. Mu1ngrukap.u, Oc6. Agriculture, R/o. Lyagalamarri Village of Pegadapalli Mandal of Jagitial District.

4. Kalledapu Jaya, Wo. Anjaiah, Age. 36 years, Ca9t9. lvl.rnlyry$qq' Occ. Househbld, R7o. Dhonoor Village of Dharmapuri Mandal of Jagitial District. ...APPELLANTS AND

1. A. Venkata Subbaiah, S/o. Late A. Venkata Seshaiah, age 65 years, Occ. Driver of Bharath Gas Lorry bearing of AP-03-TC-8852, Rio. D.No.9l29OlA, Bhadurpeta, Mutharasipal6m, Srikalahasthi, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh State.

2. Sree Vaishno Bharatgas Agencies, S/o. A. Rajender Naidu, Om Owner of Bharath Gas Lorry bearing No.AP-03-TC-852, Fl/o. D. No. 1 0-1 4312, Gandhi Road, ChiftoorTown and District, Andhra Pradesh.

3. United lndia lnsurance Company Limited, R/by its local branch Manager, Karimnagar. (Vide Policy No.05160131 1 5P1 1 4534121 Valid up to 27.O2.2O17) ...RESPONDENTS Appealfiled under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the Judgment and decrd6 in M.V.O.P. No.100/2018 dated 08-03-2023 on the file of the Court of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum Principal District Judge at Jagitial. The appeal coming on hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appe-a[.!!t9 Judgment'and Decree of the Court below and the material P?pgrs in the MVOP and-upon hearing the arguments of SRt KULDEEP YADAV, Advocate for the Appell'ants and of-SMT SWATHI GUPTA, Advocate for the Respondent No.3. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

1. That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and hereby is allowed in part by enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal from Rs. 5,52,800/- to Rs. 7,43,600/- which shall carry interest @7.5o/o p.a.

2. That the Respondent No.3/lnsurance company shall pay the compensation in the first instance within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order and later recover the same from the Respondent Nos. 'l & 2.

3. That upon such payment made, the claim petitioners are entitled to withdraw the entire amount in proportion to their shares as indicated above without furnishing any security.

4. That save as aforementioned, the decree of the Tribunal shall stands confirmed in all other respects; and

5. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. ,,TRUE COPY'/ Sd/- M. OSMAN ALI BAIG ASSISTANT REGISTRAR G SECTION OFFICER To, CR

1. The Chairman, MACT-cum-Principal District Judge, Jagtial. 2. Two CD Copies HIGH COURT DATEDi09l0712025 f / DECREE MACMA.No.911 of 2023 PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS \^