1. A. Suryanarayanaji v. 1. Gadige Satyanarayana

Counsel for the Appellants: SRI K HARIMOHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI KONDADI AJAY KUMAR The Court made the following: JUDGMENT THE HON,BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUII}' YARA M.A.C.M.A.No.3393 of 2OL9 JUDGMENT: I Ir:irr-d Sri Ii. Iirrri N,[ohan Rcdd1., [earned c[,ultsei ftrr the appeliirn ts/ clainr an ts and Sri Iiondadi Aj.il' \ rmar, Iearned standing counscl for respondent No.2 / Insr-Lr-; rrLce Companl, Perusccl the entirc rccr>rd

2. l'lris is an :ipy>ea1 preferred b1' the zrpltc Ll,,rnts / clain-r ants aggricvcd b,r thr: au:rrd dated 20.03.2O15 passerl b1. the learned Motor A<:cidents Cl;rirrr Tribuni,rl cum XXV Addl. Chief Judge, Citv Civil Crrr-rrt, Hr.'d<-.ralraci (for short 'the Tribunal') in It,l.V.Cl.P.No.2474 of 201(-r

3. 'l hc claim l)ctrtron ri.as filed b.r the appellants lollor,r,ed b1. the deatl-r ol' their son in zr motor vehicle accident whir h took plalcc on

31.03.2O16 at 1!l pnr rvhen the deceased along \.ith his frie nds u,as procecclirrg in a cur bearing No.AP-28 BP-2929. 'l/hen the car reachecl Ir-ramgurleL c ross roads, at about 23.30 holrr,;, driver of thc car has driver-r it in high speed il-l a rash and neglig rnt ntanner and dashed RTC bus; bcaring No.TS-O4-Z-O155 which r,.as coming in oppositc direction. Irr that context, the claim iretition is filed sebping compen:;ation of Rs.30,O0,OOO/ from re;pondent No. 1 \ 2 owner of the car and respondent No.2-lnsurance companl,. 'lhe claim petition u'as allowed in part fixing liability on the respondents to pa,y compensation. The quantum of compensation aw,arded at Rs. 13,90,800/ is not to the satisfacrion ol' the claimants and therelorc, thc present appeal is preferred

4. There are onl,r, two grounds urged lor claiming just compensation. The first ground is to take notional income of thc deceased at Rs.22,000 / per month instead of Rs.9,OOO/ per month as was taken by the Tribunal. The second ground is that 5O7o of the income w,as deducted towards personal expenses as the deceased was a bachelor and instead of the samc, b1. taking the dependencl, ol tu'o persons, 1/3'<t of the income is to bc dcducted

5. Coming to the first ground, the avocation of the dccearsed is shou,n to be ol a Mutton business. There is no documentar,r, proof to prove the income o[ the deceased as a person engaged in the Mutton business. The accident occurred in the year 2016. The income of an unskilled labourer in the year 2016 and prior to that uras taken at Rs.4,500/- per month on the basis of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Ramachandrappa Vs. Manage4 Rogal Sundaram Alliancet. The Tribunal has taken '1zorr; rs scc 236 .r.:+Z+_e-;i=F==7- /' 3 double the iucome ol'an unskrlled labour at Rs.!),o[r0/ per month While so. the :rppcllants ltercitr cmphasized on ttr, tral evidcnce of PW2 iiho also s:ri<1 1o Itai,c bec:n enqagt-.d in Mutto r ltusiness zrlong u'ith tlte dece:r,sccl tl):rt tlle dc,ccasr:<l psed to ei1-i Ils-20.0O0/- to 25,OO() I per llrontlr. It is a ltoint 1o bt' noted tltirr thc evidcnce ol PW2 also shou's rhat no proof is lilcd to shou.tirc rvocation oi PW2 or his incomc-. -l'he oral er.idencc ol PW2 is rt x;upported with docunrentarr. evIdc-ncc

6. The Tribr-rnirl has relied upon thc er.idenr:e ;l PW 1/father of the de cearsed u Iro deposcd tlrat tlte cleceased :r rrl himself were doing Mutton blrsiness for a long time. On tl c bztsis ol this evidencc, the Tribr.r'r:rl It:rd arrivcd zlt conclusio I that it is the appellarlt No. I t.i-ro * as doing Mutron business a t,i ttre deceased took part in tlrc said l;usincss acti\it\,. Sirrce thc ,4utt()n business was donc br larrtil_r' ntcrrlitrtrs, thc notional incomc, can lte taken at Rs. i2,000/ per morrtl.r

7. On the scconcl count. u'hen thr: deceased u,zr, r bitchelor, the amount to bc dt'dtrctcd tou.ards personal (.r l:etlses is not considered on t hc basis ol the number of de1 cndents but is determined on the basis o[ his bachelorhood or ur rrlarried status. Irrfuer:tive of prool ol clepe r-rdents, u,henever tlte vr::tim involved as I I I I i ! i :i 4 a bachelor, 50% of the income is to be deducted tou,ards personal expenses and therefore, there can be no interference on that ground. B. Considering the monthly income at Rs. |2,OOO I , as per judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranag Sethi and others2, if future prospects at 4Otht i.e., Rs.4,800/ is added to the monthiy income, the net monthly income comes to Rs. 16,BOO/ (Rs. 12,000/- + Rs.4,800/ ). From the net annual income of Rs.2,01,600/ (Rs.16,BOOx12), if 50% is deducted tou,ards personal expenses, the annual contribution of the deceased to the appcllants would be Rs.1,00,800/-. If the said ainount is multiplied by the appropriate multiplier '18' as $'as rightly taken by the Tribunal reiying on Smt. Sarla Varma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation3, the total compensation under the head of ioss of dependency' q,ould be Rs. 18,14,4OO l-. Further, the learned Tribunal has au,arded an amount of Rs.15,O0O/- cach towards funeral expenses and loss of estate. However, in vieu. of Pranay Sethi's case (2 supral, the said finding is set aside. This Court is of the considered opinion that appellants are entitled to Rs.33,00O/- towards funeral expenses and loss of estate 'lzotzy ro scc oso ' 1zoos1 a y.c. tzt "f-:1l=8+-*' ' 5 (Rs.30,0OO/- + 10'70 enhancement thereon). h-r :rddir,ion thereof, I,l rl,l! i appellants u'ho are parents of the deceased bach e1r" are entitied for Rs.40,0OO/- each i.e.. Rs.B0,O00/ under the , head of 'filial consorLium' as per the dr:crsior-r ol the Honble Sr-rpreme Court in Magma General Insurance Company Limited ir. Nanu Ram (a) Chuhru Ram and othersa

9. Thus, in all, the total compensation pa\ lble n,ould be Rs.19,27,400/ instead ol Rs.13.90,800/ as lrr,arded by the Tribunal. I 0. [n so far as interest is concerned, the lez -rned Tribunal tras awarded irtterest (tt,, 9%o per annum frc,rn the date of \ petition till the date of realization. This Court tr-relying upon the decision of the Honble Supremc Cour-t in Rajer;h and others v. Rajbir Singh and otherss, rnclined to reduce thc rate of interest awarded by the learned Tribunal to 7.5ah per annufir on entire compensation amount from the date of petitior-r r ill the date of realization.

11. Accordinglv, N{.A.C.M.A. is partly a1lor,r.ed. TIrt: compensation amount au,arded by the Tribunal is hercbv enhzrnced from olzorsl i 2013 AC,' 1403 = 2013 (+) Ar.T 35 rs scc r:o 6 Rs.13,90,BOO/ to Rs. 19,27,4OOl-, which shal1 carry interest at

7.5o/o p.a. from the date of petition til1 the date of realization. The compensation amount shall be apportioned among the appellants in the same proportion in s'hich original compensation amounts rvere directed b1 the Tribunal. Rcspondents shall deposit the said amount by u'ithir-r tu,o months from the date of receipt of a cop1, of this judgment. On such deposit, appellants al:e permitted to lvithdraq' their respective share amounts rvithout furnishing any security. There shall be no order as to costs Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this appeal, shall stand closed To, Sd/. A SREENIVAS RERDDY SISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER

1. The Chairman lvlotor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-XXV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

2. One CC to SRI K HARITMOHAN REDDY Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRI KONDADI AJAY KUMAR Advocate IOPUC] 4. Two CD Copies SS HIGH COURT DATED:21 10212025 --1 <^a' ;IA?E c)A $6 6 I 5'i$t -). () .J "(- t.- I ntriiuf ,.,..{4 JUDGMENT MACMA.No.3393 of 2019 PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS Gil o 7 1,]) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 3393 OF 2019 Appeal filed Under Sectron 173 of tr/otor Vehicles Act against the Order and decree in N/.V.O.P No.2474 of 2016 dated 20.O3 2019 on the file of the Court of the Chairman lr,'lotor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-XXV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Between:

1. Suryanarayanaji, S/o late Nagoji Aged 50 years Occ. Business, 2. A.Sugunabai, W/o A.Suryanarayanaji Aged 45 year Occ. Housewife, Both are R/o H-No.11-2'1-1845, NTR Nagar, Saibaba Nagar, L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad ...APPELLANTS AND

1. Gadige Satyanarayana, S/o G.Ramulu Aged Major Occ owner of car Rio H- No.3-16-208, Upparbasthi, Karwan, Hyderabad-500067.

2. IFFCO-TOKIO General lnsurance Co. Ltd, Rep by its lr,'lanager, Lane Opp BDR Diagnostics, SD Road, Secunderabad, Telangana- 500003 ...RESPONDENTS Appeal filed Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the Order and decree in tvl.V.O.P No.2474 of 2016 dated 20.03.2019 on the file of the Court of the Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Xxv 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 SRI K HARIMOHAN REDDY, Advocate for the Appellant and of SRI KONDADI AJAY KUMAR , Advocate for the Respondent No.2 This Court doth Order and Decree as follows: 1 . That the N/AClttlA be and hereby is allowed . 2. That the compensation amount awarded by the tribunal is be and hereby enhanced from Rs.13,90,800^ to Rs.19,27,400/- (Nineteen Lakhs Twenty Seven Thousand Four Hundred Only) which shall carry interest @ 7 5% p.a. from the date of filing the petition till the date of realizatron.

3. That the compensation amount shall be apportioned a,n,xg the applellants in the same proportion in which original compensation air oJnts were directed by the tribunal

4. That the respondents shall deposit the said amounl within a period of two months frcm the receipt of the copy of this judgment

5. That on sLrch deposits appellants be and hereby perrrr tted to withdrawn their respective share without furnishing any further secur tres.

6. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. Sd/. A SIlEENIVAS RERDDY AS{;ISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// s\croN oFFrcER To, The Chairrnan l\,4olor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Xx y' Add tional Chief Judge, City Civil Cou(, Hyderabad ) Two CD Copies SS HIGH COURT DATED:21 10212025 DECREE MACMA.No.3393 of 2019 PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS I a il xb