The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Appellants: SRI KOWTURU PAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No' 1: Ms SAI MAHITHA REPRESENTING SRI RANURAG The Court made the following: JUDGMENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAI(A M.A.C.M.A.No.3295 of 2019 JUDGMENT: Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the learned VII Additional District Judgq, Khammam, in M.A.T.O.P.No. 106 of 201,7, dated, 09.ll.2Ol7, the petitioners in the said O.P. preferred the present Appeal seeking enhancement of compensation amount.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter be referred as they were arrayed before the learned Tribunal.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the clairr petitioners, who are the wife, children and parents of Late Sri Subhan Pasha (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) frled a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation of Rs.15,OO,OOO/- on account of the death of the deceased in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on ll.12.2016. It is stated by the petitioners that on ll.12.2016, when the deceased was proceeding to Khammam on his motorcycle bearing No. AP 20L 4025 in order to attend mechanic work in his shop and when the vehicle passed near Venkatapuram Village, the driver of one RTC Bus bearing No. AP 242 O13O, drove the vehicle in a rash and negligoot manner at higtr speed anddashed the motorcycle of the / -t i I i1 2 NBK,J MACMA.No.3295 of2019 deceased. As a result, the deceased's motorcycle hit a tractor with force and he sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot'

4. It is stat.ed by the petitioners that as on the date of accident' the deceased was aged 30 years and was a motor cycle mechanic and r.sed to earn Rs.15,OO0/ per month Due to sudden death of the deceased, the petitioners lost their sole bread winner and became destitute and hence hled claim petition seeking compensation against the respondents. The respondent, Road Transport Corporation, hled a counter'

5. denying the averments made in the claim petition including' involvement of the alleged vehicle at the time of the accident, mode and manner of accident, age, occupation, and earnings of the deceased and contended that the petition is bad for non-joinder of the insured and insurer of the motorcycle bearing No AP-20L-4O25 as necessary parties and that the compensation claimed is excess andexorbitantandthereforeprayedtodismissther:laimagainstit'

6. Baserl on the pleadings made by both parties, the learned Tribunal had framed the foilowing issues:- (4 Wlether the accident took place on 11'12'2016 due to rash. and. negligent diuing of RTC bus beoing No AP 24 Z 013O bg its driuer? 3 NBK,J MACMA.No 3295 of201g ,,,?/ (it) Whetler the petitioners are enhtled fo, compensation? If so, to whnt amount and from u_rhich of the respondents? (iit) To uthat reliefr

7. During the course of trial before the Tribunal, on behalf of the petitioners, PWs. 1 and 2 were examined and Exs.Al to A5 were marked. On behalf of respondent, RW1 was examined.

8. After considering the entire evidence and documents available on record, the learned Tribunal had partlyallolved the claim petition by awarding compensation of Rs.5, 14,00O/ along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. Aggrieved by the same, the claim petitioners preferred the present Appeal. 9 . Heard Sri Kowturu pavan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners/appellants and Ms.Sai Mahitha, learned counsel representing Sri R.Anurag, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No. 1 -Road Transport Corporation(RTC).

10. The contentions of the learned counsel for appellalts are that the learned rribunal failed to consider the fact that the deceased used to get monthly income @ Rs.15,0O0 f _ asa motor cycle mechanic. The Tribunal also erred in not added future prospects t \ \ 4 NBK,J MACMA.No.3295 of2019 '.t totheincomeofthedeceasedandthereforeprayedtoallowthe Appeal by enhancing the compensation' Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent- 11. Corporation contended that the learned Tribunai' after considering al1 the aspects, had awarded reasonable compensation for which interference of this Court is unwarranted' t2 No$r the point that arises for determination ts' W7rct.her the order passed bg tle lean-ned Tibunal requires interference of thi's Court? POINT:-

13. Since there is no dispute about the occurrence of accident and death of the deceased, this Court is not inclined to discuss the said aspects. The aspects thal have to be discussed in the present Appeal are u'i1.h regard to enhancement of compens:rtion and fixing the income of the deceased'

14. Learnecl counsel for the petitioners contended that the learned Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased on meager side and failed to award future prospects to the established income of the deceased and therefore prayed for enhancement of the same. I I I I ,.] ,,/. 5 1\,BK,,J MACMA.No.3295 of 20t9

15. Admittedly, the deceased was a motorcycle mechanic. Though the claimants claimed that the deceased was earning Rs.15,000/- per month, the Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs.3,0OO/- as the claimants did not produce any proof to show that the deceased was earning Rs. 15,OO0/- per month. In Syed Sadiq and Others v. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Limitedl in case of a vegetable vendor, in the absence of any proof of income, the Apex Court considered the income of the deceased as Rs.6,50O /- per month for the accident occurred in thc year 2OO8. In the instant case, the accident occurred in the year 2O16. Therefore, considering the age and avocation of the deceased, this Court inclined to take the income of the deceased at Rs.6,500/- per month in view of the judgment of the Apex Court referred to above. A perusal of the impugned judgment shows that the learned Tribunal failed to award future prospects to the income of the deceased. Hence, this Court, by relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Nationa.l lrtsurantce Compang Limited. Vs. pra.nag Sethi and others2, is inclined to add 4Oo/o towards future prospects to the income of the deceased as the deceased being 30 years and is a Motor Cycle Mechanic at the time of the accident. After addition of tl2ot4l 2 scc 7ss , zotz ik-t zzoo \ 6 NBK,J MACMA.No.3295 of 2019 the same, the net future monthly income of the deceased comes to Rs.9,100/-. Since the number of dependants are five in number' 1 / 4m amount is to be deduced torrvards personal and living expenses of the deceased. After deducting the- personal expenses' net monthly income of the deceased would come to Rs'6'825/- and the annual lncome comes to Rs'81,90O/-' Since the age of the deceased was 3O years at the time of the accident' the appropriate multiplier is '17' as per the decision reported in Sarla Verma tt' Delhi Transport Corporation3 Adopting the multiplier '17' the total ioss of dependency on account of the death of the deceased wouldcometoRs.Sl,gOO/-x17=1'3'92'3OOlApartfromthis' the appellants are also entitled to a sum of Rs'77'000/- towards conventional heads as per the judgment of the Apex Court in Pranag Sethi's corse (7 supror} Since petitioner Nos'2 and 3 being minor ,:hildren of the deceased, this Court by following the judgment of the Apex Court in Magtna General Ins'urance Compang Linited u. Nanu Ron @ Chuht'u Rann and' other# ' hereby award. a sum of Rs 4O,O0O/- each under the head of parental consortium and filial consortium respectively Thus in all' are entitled for a total compensation of the appellants Rs. 15,49,300/-. 'r^t'oct 1298 (sc) n lzott; ta scc t to / t' l i i i I I I t 7 NBK,J MACMA.No.3295 of 2019

16. In view of the judgments of the Apex Court in Laxman @ Laxman Mourya Vs. Dittisional Manager, Oriental Insl,tro:nce Comtrtang Limited and. anothe's, the Apex Court while referring to Nagdppd. Vs. Gurudagal Stngh6 wherein the Apex Court held that the claimants are entitled to get more amount than what has been claimed. Further, the Motor Vehicles Act being a benelicial piece of legislation, where the interest of the claimants is a paramount consideration the Courts should always endeavour to extend the benelit to the claimants to a just and reasonable extent. However, considering the rationale in judgment of the Hon,ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (supral, this Court is of the considered view that an interest rate of 6%o would be reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 1,7. In the result, M.A.C.M.A. is allowed by enhancing the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.5,14,OOO/- to Rs. 15,49,3OO/-, with inrerest at 6 %o per annum from the date of original petition till the date of actual deposit. The respondent-RTC is directed to deposit the compensation within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. Upon such deposit, the appellants are entitled to s (2o11) 10 SCC 7s6 6 2OO3 AGJ 12 (SC) 8 NBK'J MACMA.No 3295 of 2019 withdrawthesameaSpertheapportionmentmadebythe Tribunal, on payment ofdeficit court fee' Miscellaneous Petitions Pending' if any, shall stand closed SD/-N.SRIHARI TY REGISTRAR I //TRUE COPY// I I S CTION OFFICER to'',. -n" Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-soecial Sessions Judge n"t' '1989-cum-vll Additional District for Trial of cases '"al'"ElJir"tjponl , L:$JI$T'II*I"' Pu'un Kumar'Advocate [oPUcl ;. il;6c i" s'i R Anurag' Advocate toPUCl 4. Two CD CoPies ry. ABK t. I l I I I I ! l i I I I 1:l€ai HIGH COURT DATED: 2910412025 JUDGMENT MACMA.No.3295 of 2019 .-.-::, .- 2rsEPzffi .+ .t. )-' . ',.r_ r{ - \),'.-j: I I 't-r,', *i-:.'-.1 i ALLOWING THE MACMAWITHOUT COSTS Or n f,\ [ 3300 l IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCEL LANEOUS APPEAL NO: 329s oF 2019 Between: Shaik Shabana Household Begam, W/o late Subhan pasha Aged 29 years, Occ 2. Shaik Mashuk Rabbani, S/o late Subhan pasha Aged 11 years, Occ. Student 3. Shaik Shahista Tanwin, D/o late Subhan pasha Aged 10 years, Occ. Student The Claim Petitioners 2 ald 3 are being minors, rep. by their mother and natural guardian claim petitioner No.1 AII are R/o H.No.1-11, Mu1'jugudem Village Nelakondapally Mandal, Khammam District AND ...Appellants/Glaim petitioners 1 to 3 1 Telangana State Transport Department, Rep. by its Managing Director Musheerabad, Hyderadad ...Respondent No.1

2. Shaik Kannam Saheb, S/o Himam Saheb Aged 62 years, Occ. Coolie Ri/o H.No.1-'t 1, Mujjugudem Viltage Nelakonffialfy fr,fJnOa-f, (n;;;;, District

3. Shaik Nur Jahan Begam, Wo Kannam Saheb Aged 57 years, Occ. Househotd, Ryo u.ru5.r-ir, rrltuiirgud.m Virri6",i.r"lrroi,oip;Jr[-rrianoat, Khammam District ...Respondents 2 & 3/Claim petitoners 4 & 5 Appeal Under section 173 of lVotor Vehicres Act against the Judgment and Decree in M.V.o.P.No.106 of 2012 dated 09-'r.r-20.r 7 on the fire of the c"ourt or ine chairman Motor Accident craims Tribunar-cum-Speciar sessions LrJgu f- iriri of Cases under SCs/STs (poA) Act, tsag-cum_vti Additionat D[trici J;;ge, Khammam. ORDER: This Appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgmeni and DecrJe of the Tribunal and the material papers in the uvob ano upon hearing the arguments of sri K.pavan Kumar, Advocate for the nppettant and of Sri R.Anurag, Advocate for the Respondent No 1' This Court doth Order and Decree as follows: ,1 , That the IMACMA be and hereby is allowed by enhancing the quantum of Compensatlon awarded by the Tribunql frol Rs 5''14'0001 to Rs' iS,+S,aOOi- with interest at d% per annum from the date of original petition till the date of actual dePosit.

2. That the Respondent - RTC is directed to deposit the Compensation within - a per'rod of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment'

3.Thatupon,suchdeposit,theappellantsareentitledtowithdrawthesame as per the appointment made by the Tribunal, on payment of deficit Court fee.

4.ThatSaVeaSaforesaid,thedecreeoftheTribunalshallstandsconfirmed in all other respects; and

5. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal //TRUE COPY// SD/.N.SRIHARI P UTY REGISTRAR S CTION OFFTCER P\ \ 'il To, 1 . The chairman fi/lotor Accident claims Tribunal-cum-special sessions Judge for Trial of cases under SCs/STs (POA) Act, 1989-cum-Vll Additional District Judge, Khammam

2. Two CD CoPies N. ABK I I HIGH COURT DATED: 2910412025 DECREE MACMA.No.3295 of 2019 ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS 1 ?A $ q