The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Appellant: SRI A.SAMPATH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI MEDURI VARA PRASADA RAO The Court made the following: JUDGMENT irQG?r,s-.:.r,ri. THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA M.A.C.M.A.No,L67 4 of 201O JUDGMENT: This appcal is filed against the Order dzit, rl 30.03.2010 in i O.P.No.10127 of 2008 passed by the XXII Additir:, rrrl Chicf Judge- cum- Mot-.lr Accidcnt Claims Tribunal, City .) riminal Oourt, Hvderabac. '2. The appcllants / petitioners hled O.P.Nr 1027 <tt 2OO8, cliriming compcnsation ol Rs.7,50,OOO / - lor tlrc dezrth ol the dcceased, M.Suresh in the road traffic acciclt I't occurred on

25.O4.200',7.

3. Thc Trial Court considering the oral a t Lr documentary cvidence griintt:d Rs.4,41,50O/ u,ith intere st 7. ''ok,per annum lrom the datc of petition to till the date of deposit.

4. The lcarned Counsel for the appe llznts / petitio ners contendcd thrlt the trial Court failed to con:,i< ler the future prospects, Iirture loss of earnings, transporl ,rnd incidental charges. Less amount of compensation for l:r:.;s of lovt: and allcction and loss o[ consortium to the appellan t s

5. Learned counsel further contends thzrt the age of the deceased s,as 23 years and he was working as iruto drive r and #+ryr$ :rit,,l:' 2 was earning Rs.6,0O0/- per month, but the trial Court taken his lncome as Rs.3,0O0/ - per month. Therefore, requested the Court to modify the award of the trial Court

6. P.Ws. I and 2 deposed that the deceased was working as a auto rickshaw driver at the time of accident and was earning Rs.6,0O0/- per month, but the Trial Court taken his income as Rs.3,000/- per month. This Court finds it reasonable to take his income as Rs.4,500/- per month, as per citation reportcd in Ralrnachand.rappa Vs Manage1 Rogal Sundrrrann Alliance Insttrance Compang Limitedl. 7 . As per the guidelines of the Hon'ble Apex Court in dictum of Sarlc Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporatton,2 if the deceascd was married, I l4tt, of his income has to be deducted as there are 4 dependants towards his personal expenses. Thus, the annual income of the deceased after deducting personal expenses comes to Rs.54,00O/- per annum and the Hon'b1e Apex Court in the dictum of No,tional Insurance Compang Limited Vs. Pranag SethF, held that the future prospects of income of the self-employed deceased shall also be included in determination of the compensation. Thus, considering the age | 20 I r (r3) scc 236 '1zooo; o scc rzr '1zor?; tr scc oao J of the deccased, 4OVo of the income has to ber zLdderl towards luture prospccts and thus the amount \\ ou1(l become Rs.56,7O07 -. This sum if multiplied r,r.ith the multiplier applicablc to thc age of the deceased i.e.18, it v.'oulcl corne to Rs.10,2O,(r)O,/ . Thus, the appellants/ petitioncrr; are t:ntitled to Rs. 10,20,6 )O,/ trnder the head 'Loss of Depende n :y'

8. Besi<lcs, thc appellants are also entitled for compcnsation undcr 'cor Lvc:ntional heads' as prescribed in ,.he <lictum of Nrrtional lnsurance Compang Limited Vs. Pranag Sethi, i.e., Rs.15,O007 - towards loss of Estate and Rs.1:j,()00/ - towards fune ral cha rgt:s.

9. Furtlrcr, thc Hon'ble Supreme Court, b1- r'eiterating the cornprehcnsivc inte rpretation of 'consortium given in the authority of Magma General Insurance Compa:n.g Limited. vs. Nq.nu Rrrm Alias Chuhttt Rarrr- & other#, and ir- tht: authority berween (Inited. India Insurance Companll Limited vs. Satinder Kaur @) Satuind.er Kaur and other:F, fortrfied that the amoun ts for loss of consortium shall be r) \varded to the children wro lose the care and protection of l.-r,'ir llar-enls as 'parental crrnsortium' and lo the parents as, 'fi irrl consortium' for the loss of [heir grown-up children, to corrpensate their ' 1:o rs,; r s scc' r to I (2020) 9 sCC rrl,t 4 agony, love and affection, care and companionship of deceased children. Accordingly, it is just and reasonable to award Rs.8O,0O0/- as filial consortium, Rs.4O,0O0/- towards parental consortium and Rs.40,000/- towards spousal consortium lo the petitioners.

10. Therefore, the appellants / petitioners are entitled for the compensation in the following terms 1 2 3 4 5 Loss of dependency Conventional Heads Filial Consortium Parental Consortium Spousal Consortium Rs.10,20,600/- Rs.30,OO0/ Rs.80,OO0i - Rs.40,OOo/- Rs.4O,OOO/- TOTAL Rs.12,1O,6OO/-

9. ln the result, the appeal is allou'ed by enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.4,41,500/ to Rs. 12,10,600/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Ten Thousand Six Hundred only) with interest at the rate of 7.5o/o per annum from the date of filing the petition till date of realization. Respondent No.2 shall deposit the entire amount within a period of one month from the date of order. On such Deposit, the respondent Nos.3 and 4 are perrnitted to withdraw Rs.1.5 lakh each, petitioner No.2 is permitted to withdraw Rs.1 lakh and the petitioner .'.:. ;ri :it-" -,r&-'-** 5 No. 1 , wifr: of the deceased is entitled to r.rrithclraw the balalce amount with interest. The appellar rts/petitioners are direct,:d to pay the deficit court fee on the enhanced amount. 'lhere shail be no order as to costs. Miscr:llaneous petitions pending, if anr,. shall stand i I t; closed //TRUE COPY// SD/-t.JAYASREE DEPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER oT 1 2 4 AS,NVB The h/otor Accident craims Tribunar-cum-XXil Additi.rrar chief Judge, city Criminal Court, Hvderabad. One CC to Sri A. Sampath Kumar, Advocate IOPUCI 9n" 99 to Sri Medurivrra pii.lir'nao, A-oiJ"j""[oluc1 Two CD Cop es ii,:,fi,t.h \-l \ o O \ 2i0fi2u5 .P -z -t f, ' 'inTC', \t :1'\7 HIGH COURT DATED:0710412025 JUDGMENT+DECREE MACMA.No.1674 of 2010 ALLOWING THE MACMA 6 \rp [ 32081 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1674 OF 2010 Between: Smt. M. Vara Lakshmi @ Aruna, W/o Late Saresh Household R/o. Native of Tekumatla (V) Now Rio. Arundhati Nagar Huts, Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad ...AppellanUClaimanats AND

1. C. Venkateshwara Reddy S/o Chennapa Reddy Major, Business R"io HNo. 3-212911 , Near Parameshwara Theater Bethamcherla Post, Kurnool District

2. The Oriental lnsurance Company Ltd., Rep. by its, Divisional Manager, Divisional Office No. lV, 6-2-976, 1st Floor, Khairatabad, Hyderabad 3. M. Rajaiah, S/o. Mallaiah Labour R/o. Tekumatla (V) Jaipur (M) Adilabad District.

4. M. Sammakka, Wo M. Rajaiah Labour R/o. Tekumatla (V) Jaipur (M) Adilabad District. ... Respondents/Respondents Appeal filed Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, against the Order and decree in M.V.O.P.No.1027 ot 2008 dated.30/08/2010 on the file of the Court of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-XXll Additional Chief Judge, City Criminal 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 A.Sampath Kumar, Advocate for the appellant and of Sri Meduri Vara Prasada Rao, Advocate for the Respondent No.2 and none appeared for the respondent Nos.1 , 3 & 4. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows: '1 . That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and hereby is allowed by enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.4,41.5001 to Rs.12,10,600/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Ten Thousand Six Hundred only) with interest at the rale of 7.50/o per annum from the date of filinq th,: petition till date of realization.

2. That the Respondent No.2 shall deposit the entire amou nt within a period of one month from the date of order.

3. That on such Deposit, the respondent Nos.3 and 4 are permitted to withdraw Rs.1 .5 Lakh each.

4. That the petit oner No.2 is be and here by permitted tc r,vithdraw Rs.1 Lakh and the petitroner No.1 , wife of the deceased is en,rt ed to withdraw the balance amou nt with interest.

5. That the appellants/petitioners are directed to pay the c eficit court fee on the enhanced amount.

6. That save as aforesaid, the Judgment and decree of the: 'tribr.rnal shall stands confirmed in all other respects; and

7. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. SD/- T.JAYASREE EGPUTY REGISTRAR /\, 7 //TRUE COPY// ,Jecrott oFFrcER To,

1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-XXll Additionerl Chief Judge, City 2. Two CD Copies Criminal Courl, Hyderabad. AS/NVB / HIGH COURT DATED:0710412025 DECREE MACMA.No.1674 of 2010 ALLOWING THE MACMA b tpW t J