OO/-. The Honble Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd v. Pranay Sethir held that while considering the compensation in cases of death, the

Counsel for the Appellants: SRl. C VIKRAM CHANDRA Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI P HARINATH GUPTA The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT a THE TION'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO M.A.C.M.A.No .2O of 2Ol4 JUDGMENT: The appellants, who are wife and daughter of the deceased, have liled this appeal against the Order and Decree dated O2.Oa.2Ol3 in M.V.O.P.No.737 of 2010 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Xvll Additional Chief Judge-cum-lll Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, I Hyderabad (for short 'the tribunal,), whereunder the tribunal has granted an amount of Rs.5,29,5O0/- towards compensation along with interest Al 7.5o/o per annum as against the claim of Rs. 1O,00,OOO/, on account of the death of the deceased in the accident occurred on 02.O2.2OO9.

2. Heard Ms.Preethi, learned counsel representing Sri C.Vikram Chandra, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri P.Harinath (iupta, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

3. Brief facts of the case:

3.1. On O2.O2.2OO9, in mid night when the deceased was going by walk near Nagole Chowrasta, one tipper bearing No.Ap 29 U_ 2455 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the 2 ,SR, J MACMA_20,2014 deceased. As a result, the deceased feli down and received injuries. Immediately he was shifted to Osmania General Hospital and later he died. 4 Subrnissions of learned counsel for the appellants:

4. l. learned counsel for the appellants vehemently contended that due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the tipper, the deceased died and at the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 33 years and used to earn an amount ol Rs.5,O00/- per month, by working in Tent house as helper. He further submits that the tribunal has not awarded any amount towards future prospects, loss of dependency, loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses. He further submits that to establish their claim, the appellants examined themselves as PWs. 1 and 2 and marked Exs.Al to A12 and the tribunal without properly considering the same, awarded meager arnount of Rs.5,29,500/-.

5. Submissions of learned counsel for respondent No.2:

5.1 Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 submits that as per Exs.A1 and A5 i.e., certified copy of FIR and Charge sheet, the age of deceased was mentioned as 5O years, ) JSR, J MACMA 20 2014 whereas the appellants have mentioned the age of deceased as 33 years in the claim petition. He further submits that the tribunal after considering the oral and documentary evidence on record has rightly awarded an amount of Rs.5,29,500/- and the appellants arc not entitled for enhancement of compensation.

6. Analvsis of the case:

6.1. This Courr considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and perused the material available on record. It is not in dispute that due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of tipper, the deceased died and at the time of accident, the deceased tvas working in Tent house as helper. According to the appellants, the age of the deceased was 33 years and to prove the facttrm, the appellants filed Ex.A8 i.e., Identity card of deceased issued by South Central Railway and Ex.A1O i.e., Voter Identity card of deceased. As per the above documents, that age of the deceased is 33 years. However, the tribunal has awarded compcnsation and calculated the amount by taking the age of deceased as 55 years.

6.2. It is pertinent to mention that trle Identity card issued by South Central Railway and voter identity card are I I I 4 ts&J MACMA-2o 2014 authenticated docurnents and merely mentioning the age of the deceased in FIR ald Charge sheet the sarne cannot be taken into consideration in the absence of any other evidence. Hence, this Court is of the considered view that the tribunal erred in taking the age of 33 years

6.3. In such circumstances, this Court is inclined to take the income of the deceased as Rs.S,0OO/-. The Honble Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethir held that while considering the compensation in cases of death, the future prospects of the self employed shall also be considered. Having regard to the age and occupation as self-employed, if 40 percent of the income is included as future prospects, the monthly income would come to Rs.7,O0O/-(5,OOO+2,OOO). As the dependants are two members, 1/3ra of the income has to be deducted towards personal expenditure, as per law laid down in Smt. Sarla Varma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporationz. Thus, the annual contribution of the deceased to the appellants would be of Rs.56,O0O/- (7OOOxi2-28OOO!. As per his age i.e.33 years as on the date of accident, the appropriate multiplier would be '16', the total arnount comes to Rs.8,96,OO0/- (S6,OOOxl6), The I zotT (6) 170 (sc) '] (2009) 6 s.c.c. 121 5 JSR, ] MACMA 20_2014 claimants are entitled for the said amount under the head of loss of dependency. As there are two claimants, they are entitled to Rs.44,000/- each towards loss of consortium, which would come to Rs.88,OO0/- (Rs.44,000 x2). As the Tribunal has not \ granted any amount towards funeral expenses and loss of estate, this Court is inclined to grant Rs.7O,OOO/- towards funera-l expenses and loss of estate. Accordingly, the appellants are granted total compensation amount of Rs. 1O,54,O00/_ (Rs.8,96,o0or Rs.88,o0o+Rs.7O,0OO).

7. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A is allowed, enhancing the compensation amount granted by the tribunal to the appellants from Rs.5,29,5O0/- to Rs.1O,S4,OOO/-(Rupees ten lakhs fifty four thousand onl,y). The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest fut 7.5o/o per annum from the date of claim petition till realization . The enhanced amount shall be deposited by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 jointly and severally within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The appellants are entitled to the apportionment of the amount as directed by the Tribunal. On such deposit, the appellants are. permitted to withdraw the amount without furnishing an-y security. However, the appellants are directed to 6 J5R, ] NTACMA_20_2014 pay the deficit court fee on the enhamced amount' There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, il any, shall s ciosed. No order as to costs' /ITRUE COPYI/ sd/- P.cH. NAGABHUS AMBA ASSISTANT REG TRAR \ / SECTTON OFFICER To 'Iffi"?il'#?,i;lS[?JAi"^f'llj;'HfBJJ5:13]i']&'"'lif*1x:li'0i'?l?' HFff i ?ll ig,pjil:,",.'irrw,3 I* ^t3#:ili6?t'"? I I HIGH COURT DATED:0310112025 JUDGMENT MACMA.No.2O of 2014 i 1tt E SrAr€ lt1t [ff 26 lr- C).\ ( :l o o l \ Y+, t t) E .9 PA1 t, + ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS @ t IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 20 0F 2014 Between:

1. ttl.Vijaya Laxmi, Wo.late M.shanker, Aged 30 years, Occ: Household 2. M.Kusumakavya, D/o.late M.Shanker, aged 15 years, Occ: Student fAppellant No.2 being Minor, rep by her mother i.e., Appellant No.1] Both R/o.Plot No.'101, Nagole, Jaipuri, LB Nagar, Greater Hyderanad. ...APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS AND

1. B.Ram Reddy, S/o.B.Venkat Reddy, Aged Major, Occ: Business R/o.17-1- 3861118167 , S.N.Reddy Colony, Champapet, Hyderabad.

2. The New lndia Assurance Co Ltd, rep by its Senior Divisional Manager O/o. 2nd Floor, Madan Mohan Building,.Rahigunj, R.P.Road, Secunderabad. ...RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the Order and Decree made in M.V.O.P.No.737 ot 2O10 dated 02/08/2013 on the file of the Court of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-XVll Additional Chief Judge-cum- lll Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Court below and the material papers in the MVOP and upon hearing the arguments of Sri C.VIKRAM CHANDRA, Advocate for the appeallant and of Sri P.HARINATH GUPTA, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows: I r/ //

1. That the MACMA be and hereby is allowed enhancing the compensation amount granted by the Tribunal to the appellants from Rs.5,29,500/- to Rs.'10,54,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Fifty FourThousand only);

2. That the enhanced compensation amount be and hereby shall carry interest @7.SYo per annum from the date of claims petition till realization;

3. That the enhanced amount be and hereby shall be deposited by respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severally within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of the Judgment;

4. That the appellants be and hereby are entitled to the apportionment of the amount as directed by the tribunal;

5. That on such deposit, the appellants be and hereby are permifted to withdraw the amount without furnishing any security;

6. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. Sd/- P.CH, NAGABHUSH ASSISTANT REGI BA RAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER 1 2 The Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-XVll Additional Chief J udge-_cum-l I I Additional Metropolitan Sessions, Judge, Hyd reabad. Two CD Copres To w HIGH GOURT DATED:0310112025 DECREE MACMA.N o.20 oI 2014 ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT C:OSTS @ \V, '6r\t)