The High Court · 2025

Judgment

This appeai rs filed by the claimants, aggrieved by the Order I and Decree dated 01 .07.2021 in M.V.O.P.No.125 o{ 2014 passed by the Chairman. fVlotor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-XXVI Additional Chief Judge. City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short "the Tribunal"). 2

For convenience and clarity, the parties herein are referred to as they were arrayed before the Tribunal

3. The case of the petitioners before the Tribunal was that on

08.09.2013 at about 7.00 p.m., the deceased was going on an evening walk near Tirumala Padmavathi Garden, Boduppal, the rider of the Honda Activa bearing No.AP-29-AY-3550 came in a rash and negligent manner at a high speed and dashed the deceased from behind, due to which he fell down and sustained grievous injuries lmmediately, he was shifted to Kamineni Hospital, L.B Nagar and while undergoing treatment, the deceased succumbed to injuries on

14.09 2013. The claimants sought a compensation of Rs.7,00,0001

4. The respondent No.1 remained ex-parte. \ t I 2 ETD,J MACMA No.546 2021

5. The respondent No.2/lnsurance Company has filed counter denying the averments of the petition with regard to the occurrence of the accident, age, avocation and income of the petitioner. lt is further contended that the driver of the motor bike did not have valid driving license as on the date of the accident and that their company is not tiable to pay compensation.

6. Based on the above contentions, the Tribunal has framed the following issues.- ,.1 2 3 Whether the deceased-P. Balagangadar Tilak died due to the rash and negligent driving of the dnver oft he Honda Activa beanng No.AP-29-AY-3550? Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation. lf so. how much and from whom? To what relief?"

7. To prove their case, the petitioners got examined PWs 1 to 3 and Exs.Al to A5, Ex.X3 to X5 were marked. On behalf of the respondents, RWs '1 and 2 were examined and Exs.B1 to 84, Exs.X1 and X2 were marked. B. Based on the evidence on record, the Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.3,'t0,000/-. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is preferred by the claimants seeking enhancement of comp*rsation. \ I l ETD,J MACMA No.546 2021 9 Heard the submissions of Sri P. Chandramouli, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Harinath Reddy Soma, learned counsel for respondent No.2

10. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the tribunal has granted very meager amount towards compensation and thus the tribunal failed to consider the income of the deceased and also has awarded meager amounts under various heads and that the deceased is the Retired Employee He therefore, prayed to enhance the compensation

11. Learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand has submitted that the deceased is stated to be a Real Estate agent, but has not filed any proof in this regard and that the tribunal has rightly assessed the compensation. He further argued that the driver of the crime vehicle is proved to have a fake driving license, which is alleged to be forged and thus the lnsurance Company is not liable to pay any compensation. Therefore, he prayed to dismiss the appeal

12. Based on the above rival submission, this Court frames the following points for consideration:- \ 1 \ 2 Whether the claimants are entitled to enhancement of compensation. Whether the Order and Decree passed by the Tribunal need any inteierence? 3 To what relief? I I t i ETO,J MACMA No.546 2021

13. Point No.1:- a) The claimants are aggrieved by the quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal. lt is their case that the deceased used to do Real Estate business and earn Rs.20,000/- b) PW1 is the wife of the deceased, she asserted that her deceased-husband used to earn around Rs.20,000/- per month out of Real Estate Business. No other witness is examined in this regard. However. the age of the deceased is '60' years as per the Post Mortem Examination Report. He is survived by the wife and children who are the petitioners herein. Thus, it is elicited that he used to run a family of three members. The tribunal assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.6,0001 per month which appears to be justified on a reasonable hypothesis. c) As per the dicta laid down in National lnsurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi & Othersl , lOoh of the income needs to be added towards future prospects. As the deceased is aged '60' years, adding 10% towards future prospects i.e., 6000+600 would give Rs.6,6001- per month, which comes to Rs.6,600/- x 12 = Rs.79,2001 per annum. 1 AtR 2017 SCC 5157 5 ETD,] MACMA No.546 2021 I I d) The number of claimants herein are three and therefore, 1/3'd deduction need to be made to his income towards personal expenses and this would come up to Rs.52,800/- (Rs.79 2001 (-) Rs.26,400/-) e) The multiplier should be chosen with regard to the age of the deceased as per column No.4 of the table given in Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation2, the deceased being aged '60' years, the appropriate multiplier is '9'. Therefore, lhe loss of dependency is assessed as Rs.4,75,200/- (Rs.45,600 x 9). f) ln the light of Pranay Sethfs case. Rs.150001 towards loss of estate and Rs.15,0001 towards funeral expenses and Rs.40,0001 towards loss of consortium have to be awarded and the said amounts should be enhanced by 10% every three years. S) ln Magma General lnsurance Company Limited v. Nanu Ram @Chuhru Ram and others3, the Apex Court has elaborately discussed the principles laid down in Pranay Seth/s case and has further held that not only the spouse but the parents and children of the deceased are also entitled to loss of consortium. Therefore, in 'zoog 161 scc tz t t 1zot8) ts scc t:o / ETD,J MACMA No.546 2021 the present case, the claimants would get Rs.48,400t each towards loss of consortium, hence, the compensation amount under this head would be Rs.1,45,2001- instead of Rs.40,000/-. Further an amount of Rs.18,150/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.18,150/- towards Loss of Estate have to be awarded h) The petitioner counsel has contended that the medical expenses for his treatment prior to death after the accident has to be awarded. Ex.X5 is the copy of case sheet disclosing the treatment underwent by the petitioner in Kamineni Hospital, while Ex.X4 is his death summary. but it is elicited from the evidence of PW3 that he was treated under Arogya Sree Scheme, therefore, no amount is awarded for medical bills. Considering the said fact of inaptient treatment, an amount of Rs.25,000/- is awarded towards incidental expenses and attendant charges i) ln all, the claimants are entitled to the following compensation amounts: 1 2 endenc Compensation under the head of loss Compensation towards loss of consortium Compensation towards loss of estate 3 4. Compensation towards funeral i 5 expenses Compensation towards incidental expenses and attendant charges Total \ I Rs a,75,200r I Rs.1 ,45,2001 Rs.1 8,1 501 Rs l8,150r ] Rs.25,000^ Rs.6,56,700/- / l ETD,I MACMA No.546 2021 j) The Tribunal has awarded Rs.3,10,0001, while, this Court arrived at a compensation of Rs.6,56,7001 and hence, it is held that the claimants are entitled to enhancement of compensation. Thus, Point No. 1 is answered accordingly 1+ Point No.2:- a) ln view of the findings arrived at Pornt No.1, it is held that the order and decree of the Tribunal need to be modified with regard to the quantum of compensation. This Court has enhanced the compensation to Rs.6.56,700/- from that of Rs 3,10,0001 i.e., awarded by the Tribunal b) lt is contended by the lnsurance Company that the driver of the crime vehicle did not have valid driving license, and they got examined RWl and 2 to prove their case c) RWl is the Legal Retainee of the lnsurance Company and through his evidence, Ex Bl/copy of policy and Ex.B2llegal notice issued to the owner and driver of the vehicle are marked d) RW2 is the Junior Assistant, working in RTA, Secunderabad. ln hi S \evidence, Ex.X2 is marked, it is the copy of driving license issued to one Prashanth Kumar Patturi S/o P. Aaraiah and the said driving license is valid from 18.08 2004 lo 24'10'2004 to drive LMV 8 ETD,J MACMA No.546 2021 non transport and motor cycle with gear. The driver of the crime vehicle as revealed from the charge sheet under Ex.A2, Patturi Raju S/o Samabaiah is charged with Section 1Bl of the Motor Vehicles Act apart from the IPC offences. The notice was issued by the insurance company. Through RW1 it is elicited that they have served notices on the driver and owner of the vehicle vide Ex 83 and its service is proved vide Ex.B4 which is an acknowledgment card, thereby, it is elicited that the rider of the motor bike did not possess valid driving license as on the date of accident. Hence, with regard to the liability, the insurance company cannot be fastened with liability when the driver did not have valid driving license. e) ln National lnsurance Company Limited Vs. Swaran Singh and Othersa, it is held that even in case of absence, fake or invalid license or disqualification of the driver for driving, the lnsurance Company is liable to satisfy the award in favour of third party at the first instance and later recover the award amount from the owner of offending vehicle, even when the lnsurance Company could able to establish breach of terms of policy on the part of the owner of the offending vehicle '2004 (2) At.D (sc) i6 1 ETD,J MACMA No.546 2021 f) ln the decision of the Apex Court in United lndia lnsurance I Company Limited vs. S. lyyapanu, it was held that even though the insurer has taken the defense that there is a breach of conditions of the policy excluding the lnsurance Company from the liability that the driver is not duly licensed in driving the crime vehicle which met with the accident, third party has a statutory right to recover compensation from the insurer and it was for the insurer to proceed against the insured for recovery of the amount paid to the third party, in case, there was any breach of conditions of the insurance policy. ln Shammaanna and Another Vs. Divisional Manager, S) Oriental lnsurance Company 6, the Apex Court has held that the doctrine of pay and recovery has to be made applicable, when the driver does not possess a valid driving license to cover the third party risk. h) ln the latest judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court dated 1.7.2019, rendered in Parminder Singh vs. New lndia Assurance Company Limited & OthersT , it is held that if no driving license is possessed by the driver of the offending vehicle, the principle of 'pay and recovery' can be ordered to direct the lnsurance Company to pay the 5 1 (2t13 {7) scc 62) (20 rQ 3 rAC 677 (2019) 7 SCC 217 / 10 ETD,J MACMA No.546 2021 compensation to the victim and then recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle. i) ln view of the above held discussion and in light of the above cited decisions, it is held that the lnsurance Company shall pay the compensation and then recover the same from the insured. Point No.2 is answered accordingly

15. POTNT NO.3: ln the result, the appeal is partly allowed, modifying the Order and Decree dated 01.07.2021 in lt/.V.O.P.No '125 o'f 2014 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-XXVI Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad by enhancing the compensation from Rs 3,'10,0001 to Rs.6,56,700/- and the enhanced amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7 .5% per annum from the date of claim petition till realization. With regard to the liability, the lnsurance Company shall pay compensation and recover the same from the insured. However, the interest for the period of delay, if any, is forfeited. The respondents are directed to deposit the compensation amount with accrued interest within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this Judgment after deducting the amount if any already deposited. On such deposit, the t \ 11 ETD,] MACMA No.546_2021 claimants are enti'ed to withdraw the said amount without furnishing any secunty. No costs Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, in this appeal, shall stand closed SD/- . OSMAN ALI BAIG SI TANT REGIST //TRUE COPY// \ To,

1. The Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cu Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. (With records, 2. One CC to Sri. P. Chandramouli Advocate IOPUC] 3. One CC to Sri Harinath Reddy Soma Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies KVR/gh Y^,- CTION OFFICER Vl Additional Chief SIATE t tts t$1$ !;') <) * r.- - -.-: [ 2 DRAFTS ] 1 HIGH COURT DATE D: 1 4/0812025 JUDGMENT+DECREE MACMA.No.546 of 2021 ALLOWTNG THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS. eoE .eR'" XGt 134441 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 546 OF 2021 Between:

1. P. Madhavi, Wo Late P. Balagangadar Tilak Aged. 50 years Occ. House Hold R/o H-No.9-12-1, Hanuman Nagar, Boduppal, Ghatkesar Mandal Ranga Reddy -092

2. P. Shiva Sai Kumar, S/o Late P. Balagangadar Tilak Aged 28 years Occ. Un- employee R/o H-No.9-12-1 , Hanuman Nagar, Boduppal, Ghatkesar Mandal Ranga Reddy -092

3. P. Ragamani, D/o Late P, Balagangadar Tilak Aged. 29 Years Occ. House Hold R/o H-No.9-12- 1, Hanuman Nagar, Boduppal, Ghatkesar Mandal Ranga Reddy -092 ... Petitioners/Appellants AND 1 . K. Sunitha Reddy, Aged 29 Years Occ. Owner of Vehicle bearing no. AP 29 AY 3550 R/o. H-No.1-75l4lcl 10, Brindhavan Colony, Boduppal, Ghatkesar Mandal, R.R.Dist - 500 039

2. ICICI LOMBARD General lnsurance Co. Ltd, Rep. by its Manager (Legal), 3rd Floor, Osman Plaza Near Nagarjuna Circle, Punjagutta X Roads, Hyderabad ...Respondents Appeal filed Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act,19B8 against the Order and decree in M.V.O.P.No. 125 of 2014 dated. 0110712021 on the file of the Court of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- XXVI Additional Chief Judge,.City Civil Court, Hyderabad. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon peruslng 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 Sri. P. Chandramouli, Advocate for the Appellant and of Sri Harinath Reddy Soma, Advocate for the Respondent No.2 and none appeared for the respondent No. 1 . This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

1. That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and hereby is partly allowed, modifying the order and decree, dt:011O712021 in M.V.O.P.No. 125 of 2014 passed by the Chairman, MACT-cum- XXVI Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court. *yderabad; &, r,oh( st rh. *lffi fu 3r loroml- to ga.0,56r-+od- 2. That the enhanced amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7.50/o pet annum from the date of claim petition till realization;

3. That the insurance company shall pay compensation and recover the same from the insured:

4. That save as aforesard, the Judgment and decree ofthe Tribunal shall stands confirmed in all other respects; and

5. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. //TRUE COPY// S . OSMAN ALI BAIG NT REG To,

1. The Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cu Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. (With records,

2. Two CD Copies \ ECTION OFFICER Vl Additional Chief ) KVR/gh HIGH COURT DATED: 14l0812025 \ DECREE MACMA.No.546 of 2021 ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS. soi\ I ,^cot X.*