The High Court · 2025

Order

aled 22-01-2020 in IVACMA No. 57 of 2020 and direct the respondent No '1 / rppellant to deposit 50% of the award along with proportionate cost and interes 1 and also permit the petitioners to withdraw the deposited amount and to pass

Counsel for the Appellant(s):SRI. A. RAMAKRISHNA REDt," Counsel for the Respondents No.1 to 3 : SRl. M LINGAM Counsel for the Respondents No.4 : - The Court made the following: JUDGMENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA M.A.C.M.A.No.57 of 2O2O JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed b1' tl-re appcllanl Insurance Compar-r1, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the An,ard and decree passed by the XIV Addl.Chicf Judge(FTC), City Cn,il Court, Hyderabad (hereinafter relered to 'lcarned 1'ribunal') in O.P.No.2344 of 2OI2, dated lI.O9.2O19, rvherein the Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.19,00,457 I to the responder-rts /clarmants herein

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties r.t,ill be hereinafter referred to as they are arrayed before the learned Tribunal.

3. The brief facts of the case are that claimants fited M.V.O.P.No.2344 of 20 12 under Section 166(,4) of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 seeking compensation for the death of the B.Dasarath Reddy (hereinafter referred as 'deceased') rvho died in the accident alleged to have caused due to rash and negligent driving o[ the driver of the crime vehicle i.e., Sawaraj Mazda

4. On 08.04.2012, the deceased was returning on his Koukuntla on his motorcycle beanng No.AP 28 AP 698 from Chevella and when he 2 U. 4-c-!', .]LN-q.st of 1o2Q reached Chintterupa-lly gate, the driver of offer r ing veh:cle Sau'ra.i Mazda bearing No.AP-29-V-0065, drove in rash .r': Ilcqlig<:tlt IniiIlllcr- dashed thc molorcycle due to which thc deci:' sccl lcll dorr tl ittlr, sllstained srievous head injury and other injuries I Iovcr the boch atlr died on the spot. The Police registered a case, vide t )-imr-' No.47 of 20 lll agair-rst the driver of the offending vehicle undcr !i r:tion 304-A ol IPC Due to the saicl accident, the claimants sulfered nl: -rtal agon\', filrar-rciai problems, lost love and affection and future ir t c'rnr: sollrce of th(l deceased, as the claimants were dependent ll )ln deceased. TI-t': claimants clairned an amount of Rs.10,00,000/ i si comp€nsation 1o. the death of the deceased under various heads.

5. The contention of the clajmants before the 'f ibunal, was that as on the date of accident, the deceased was aged abo rt 38 l'ears and rt'as hale and healthv and working as agriculturist ar c[ cioing reaL estatt: business and used to earn Rs.20,000/- per mont - , u'hich he used to contribute the same for the welfare of the famill l)uc' to the sudderr death of the deceased, the claimant No.1 lost her hr srbar-rd ar-ld claiman[ No.3 u,ho is son of the deceased lost their father r-rd iill the claimants lost their conjugal happiness and lost deceased's .,,lnpzuly ald there is 3 M.A.C.M.A.No.57 of 2020 no other person to take care of the claimants and the petitioners lost their dependency

6. Before the learned Tribunal, respondent Nos.l Drrver ol olfending vehicle remained ex-parte. Respondent No.2 TATA AIG Generai lnsurance Company Limited, filed counter-affrdavit, denying a-11 the averments made in the claim petition, includrng the manner in rvhrch the accident took p1ace, age, avocation and income ol the deceasecl and contended that the accident occurred due to self ncgligence of the deceased and denied that the crime vehicle was insured by the rn s urance company and also denied that the respondcnt No.1 is the owner of the crime vehicle and the compensation claimed by the claimants was excessive and prayed to dismiss the claim petilion 7 . Basing on the pieadings and averments made by both the counsels, the learned Tribunal framed the follow,ing issues which reads as under: " 1) WTrcther the pleaded accident had occuned resutting irr death of the deceased, B.Dasarath Reddy, due to the rash and negligent cliuing of the diuer of motor uehicle (Swaraj Mazda beaing regtstrotion No.AP-29-V-0065) bg its diuer? ii) Whether the petittoners ore entitled to anA contpensotion and If so, at what quantum and what is the liabilitg of the respondents? f 4 !r.4.tLU-4.Ne.!? el 2020 ,3. After pemsing the oral and documentar5,' er. r , trces antl going inttr rhe entire record and the evidences placed b,r l, lh the 1;arties, trl iearnecl Tribunal :rllou'ed rhe claim petition and c()rl r. to conclusion tha the claimants s,ould be entitled for an com;. :nsation asarcl oi Rs.19,00,457/ rrlong with interest ta) B "k per annrr r

9. Being aggrieved bv the com pensation am r r- t au arrled br t h,' learned Tribunal, the present appeal is Iiled by thc Lopcllant/ [nsuranc,' Companl' or-r thc ground that the cheque issued 1 ' thc orvrter/ in sr.l rcrl tou,ards thc payment of the premium is dishonort r 6111" to insufficien lunds much prior of the accider-rt and the appellant insttrant:e companl has cancelled thc policy much prior to the occurrer r e of the zrccidenl

10. 'Learne<l corrnsel for the appellant submits t'r rt ou'ncr/insurcd i:; running a lravel business and he approached thc :ppellant insLlrancc compan]'and prcsented a cheque bearing No.21012-r ), dated 29.12.2O1' to$,ards pa],menI of premium and the sarne was prt sented before HDF(] Bank for realization, but the said cheque wa: returned u'ith arr endorsement "lnsufiicient funds" on 31.12.201 1 :nd the same u'a:; intimated to the owner/insured as well as I? ".O. authorities orr 12 .O 1 .2012 inlorrn ing the cancellation of the pol i, r, ar-rd the acciden t 5 M.A.C.M.A.No.57 of 2020 was occurred on 08.04.2012 i.e., three months after the cancellation ol the insurance policy

11. Learnecl counsel lor the appellant further contended that learned Tribunal has fixed the liabilitv on the appellant/ Insurance Companr. relying on the trx.A8 which is MVI report which shou,s that the insurance policy No.O100538839401 is valid up to 29.12.2012, hou,ever the learned Tribunal failed to note that the appellan t l n surance company issued the policy for the first time on 30.12.2Ol I and valid up to 29.12.2O 12 and it was cancelled right from the inception bv rts notice dated l2.O 1.2012, r.e., only after the receipt of the memo from thc banker intimating the return of the cheque q,as dishonored due to insufhcient fund, but the Tribunal failed to appreciale the lact that in case of dishonoring of cheque against payment of premium, the policv endorsement clearly mentioned in the policy that "in the euent of dishonor of cheuque(s), Lnsurance couer prouided under the documents outomaticallg stands cancelled. Jrotn inception irrespectiae of uhether a separate cotnmunication is sent or rtot."

12. Learned counsel for the appellant also draws attention of this Court to the Insurance Regulatory arrd Development Authorities (IRDA) (manner of rel-eipt of premium) Regulation, 2OO2 the exercise ol pou.er I 6 E 4E !r.A.!pE.ef 2o2Q under sub-section 163 of Section 6'l-VB and Sect-,ct 114-A cf Insuranc,: .Act. 19,1S rules framecl ir-r consultation u,itlr '-rsuratlcc A<1r'isc-,l-. Cornmrttec. t}-re IRDA has framed Rule 4 u'her: it is stertcd that consideration (premium) towards insurance is r ot reaiizcd b1'' thi: insurer, tl'rc policl,' shall treat as void ab-initio zur 1 also relied or-r th,: precederlt judgmer-rts of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vational Insurance Compang limited Vs. Seema Malhotral, wherein Lre Hott'trle Suprem,: Court held that il the cheque issued by the Insure i l.ou'ards ltayment ci premium is dishonored, the lnsurance Companv lI Lr] no liallrlitv to pa.' any compcnsatioll to the claimants.

13. Learned counsel for the appellants further arg led that the leamed Tribunal has granted more than the compensa t .on claimed b,v the claimants in the claim petition. The learned '1 r bunal w'ithout ani' docr.rmentary evidence u,ith regard to the income :f the deceased has erroneousll, taken Rs.16,000/- p.m. as income sole .,2 relying on the self serving sLatement of the PW. i i.e., wife of the dece ased. The agc of the deceased u,as taken as 55 years which is not in di, pute and as per the Full Bench Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme (lourt ir-r Notionrrl ' 2001 AO Page No.638 i .,/' 7 M.A.C.M.A,No.57 of 2020 Insurance Compang Limited. a, Pranag Sethi o.nd. others2, the future prospects of age group of 50-60 is mentioned as 10,% but the learned Tribunal has added 3Ook to the future prospects and the interest granted by the Tribunal@ 8% on the compensatioh amount is on higher side and prayed this Court to set aside the Tribunal order against thc appellan t/ Insurance- I4. Learned counsel lor the claimants/ respondents submits that after considcring the entire evidence available on record, the [earned Tribunal has awarded just compensation, which needs no interference and further contended that it is mandatory duty of the insurance company to communicate the insurer about cancellation of the Insurance policy and further urged that mere dishonor of cheque along is not a ground to exonerate the Insurance Company from the liability. He further reiied on judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Oriental Insurantce Compang Limited u. Ind.erjit Kaur and. otherss and National Insurance Compang Litnited. u. Balkar Rarn and other#. 2 zott ec: ztoo r ArR 1998 sc 588 * 2013 ACJ 2416 t B M.A c.M.A.No.57 of 2020

15. Heard, Sri A.Ramo,krishna Redd.g, lealri' cl counsel for thtr appellant and Sn M.Lingam, learned counsel fot , L,: respondent Nos to 3. Nonc appearccl for respondent No.4. Perus:d the rnaterial orl record

16. Admittedl1,, the clarmants have not filed cro; ; appeal against thc Arvard and decrcc passed by the Tribunal. As su: r, the claimants ar(l satished u,ith tl-re Ar'vard and decree and the comp tlsation awardecl b"' the Tribunal. Thc only point arose before this Crr lrt in this appeal is that: "t) Whether the learned Tibunal has ightlg fut't l. the liobiLitg on the appellan.t to pag the compensation ii) Whether the Tnbunal hctd rightlg consider the r:, im petition filed - unrler Section 166 (A) I"totor Vehicle Act, 1988 r nd ntles 455 of M.V.Rules 1989 and atuarded just compensation. t t'.he cloimants " Point No.1 & 2: 17. Admittedl]', the deceased got severe injuries , ll over the body due to accident occurred on 08.O4.20 12 and died on 1l e spot. The Ex Bl is insurance po1ic1,. Ex.AS, r"'hich is an MVI report o crime vehicle which shorvs that the said ins.Lrrance policy is shown vz I d uP to 29.12.201|2,. The appellant claimed that they have cancelled the [.nsurance Policy and intimated the RTO ald respondent No.4 herein, I owever there are no I M.A.C.M.A.No.57 of 2020 postal acknorvledgment receipt to prove that the appellant has actuallv sent the cancellation intimation letter to the respondent No.4 and also the lnsurance Company did not publish any notice in neu'spaper intimating about cancelled of policy with regard ro crime vehicle I B. In Full Bench of the Apex Court in the decision reported 1n Oriental Insuro'nce Co. Ltd.. u. Inderjit .Kaurs has categorically held that the rights of the third parties to claim compensation both from the insurccl ard insurer are not affected under 1aw bv the conduct of insur-ed in issuing a cheque, which was later on dishonored. The relevant portion at paragraph No. 9 is extracted as under: "The policg of insurance that the appellant issued was a representation upon which the authoities and third parties utere entit\ed" to oct. The appellant uas not absolued. of its obligations to third parties under the policg because it dtd not receiue the premium. Its remedies in this behalf loy against the insured."

19. In another decision reporled in Neut India Assurance Co. Ltd. u. Rula6, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under "Thus, ang contract of insurance under Chopter 71 of the Motor uehicle Ac| 19BB contemplates a third partA who is not a ' AIR 1998 sc 588 u 2ooo ACJ 630 -: ?.1.. 10 [!!L]i!!. A. N o. s 7 of 2020 signotorA or a portrl to the contract of i" neueftheless, protected bg such contract. As l-( court in Netu Asiatic Insurance Co. Ltd. u Pr'z; Aswani {1958 65 ACJ 559 (SC)}, the nghts o1 get indemnified can be exercised onlg again:;l. uehicle. It is thu-s clear that the third partg is it does not con'te into the picture at alL in the mat premium. Whether lhe premium has been po,i; concerrL of the third p arlg who is concerned. t there was a policy lssued in respect of the ueh.'., accident and it is on tlrc basis of this policy thu maintained bg the th.ir-d partg against the insur ;urance but is, inted out bg this ;ttmol Dh.a ruamal l'r.e third partA to l,.e insurer of the t'. concen"ted and e:r of patlment of c;r n.ot is not the t,th the fact that l.'z inuolued in the the claim con be ),'. The decision, which b a three Judge squarely couers the present case also cancellation of the insurance policy in tlte n: ground that the chequ.e through tuhich prem,i .t dishonoured, ruouLd not affect the ights of tlx had accrued on the issuance of the policg ort 1 the accident took place. If on the date of acc t poticg of insurance in respect of the uehicle in t partg would. haue a claim against the insurc: the otuner of the uehtcle u.nuld haue to be indz of the claim of that panly. Subsequent c) insurance policy on the ground of non-pay' ulould not affect the ights alreadg accnted in . party." Bench decision, I'he subsequent tlnt case on tLte tL t as paid was l^tird partg rthiclr rc date on uhicLt ent, there u)as a ttestion, the third <:e compang and r,,nifi.ed in respect rcellotiort of the rcnt of premium 'o,uour of the third 11 M.A.C.M.A.No.57 of 2020

20. In National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Balkar Ro,m & OrsT on 9rh July, 20 I3. thc Hon'blc Supreme Court held that, where dishonor ol chequc occurrccl bclbrc accidenL but intimation was after accident, insurer cannot relv on such delense ald the relevant paragraph read as under: Houeuer, tue contpltmert Ms. Kiran Sui, learned counsel for the appellant for cuttirrg short the controuersA bg fairtg poittirtg out the rotio of the judgment (2012) 5 SCC 234 titLed United Indta Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Laxmamma & Ors. wherein it hcLs been held that tlte insurance companA is Itctble to satisfy the award if the intimotion regarding the dshonor of the cheque and cancellation of policg is communicated to the policA-holder after the date of the accident. Thus, the defence of the insurance companA that the policA of insuronce u.tas not ualid since the cLrcque had been dlshonoured pnor to tlte occident Luould not exonerate them frorn making the pagment of comperusation. In this matter, admittedLy the acciclent had taken place on 19.04.2OO0 and the cheque although had been dishonoured prior to the accident on 17.04.2OOO, the intimation to tlrc policy-holder had been giuen bg the insurance companA on 26.04.2O00, in uieu of tuhich the insurance companA cannot be allowed to contend that the policy-holder u.tas not holding a ualid policg / AIRoNLTNE 2013 sc 91

1.2 !{4 !-I/i.4-I!9.5 2 s! ?o-2o of insurance irt regard to the uehicle ruhicL accicle'rtt. t\clmittedhl. the pr-;lic:t1 h.older hctc' artothtzr c:he'c1ue' srr b.s rin,r lin 17 the cheque tt't t rnet with an lrect.dA i;suecl it. lnd t'rLrlier been dishonoured. 21 . The core pnr-rciple laid dorvn bv the Hon'ble li rpremc (lourt in thr: abovc said judgments are that lnsurance conrl> L:rv had to scnd lr cancellalior.r noticc to botl'r the parties, but in ll c instar t casc, tl-t,: insurance company failed to scncl cancellation not i 'rr to the responden t No..1 l-rerein and also failccl to file postal receipt or hc acknor,"'led gme n t senl to RTO and also thcre is no notice sent to res rondent No.4 herein inforrning that the insurance poiicl' got cancelled- r view of the same, it cannot be held that the policy holder was not ho r ing a r.alid policS. of insurance zrt the time of zLcciclent. Hence, contenri: r s of the appellants- Insurance Company that the policy of the crirl ' vehicle has being cancelled and that the insurance policy is nc,' liable to pa!' arly compensation is accordinglv rejected ald point ,,r. 1 is a.trsq,ered in favour of re sponden ts / clai mants herein.

22. As far as quantum of compensation is cot't,: 'rrred, the claimants claimed that as on the date of the accident, thc cleceasecl was doing agriculture and real estate busirlcss and was ezu l ing Rs.20,O00/' pcr month, ho',vever no docutnentary proof, such :tr; l;alary ccrtificate ()r ,! I i3 M.A.C.M.A.No.57 of 2020 bank entries to shorv that the deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- per month. The learned Tribr-rnal has taken the income of the deceased as Rs. 16,000/ - uithout anv documentary evidence

23. As per proceeding ol Collector & District Magistrate, Ranga Redd1,- District, vide Proc.No.C2 l62ll2Ol3, dated 31,01.2013, the minimum rvages for the Serni skilled s orker (Rccord assistant, Mail recorded (S.S.C. passed), Milk \4an, N{ilker and other such '"r,orkers is hxed Rs.250/- for Rural area zrnd Rs.305 for Municipzrl area for the hnancial 1,ear 20 \2

24. In Shaikh Sadik Shcrik Rafique a. Reliance General Insurance Compang Limited and otherse, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has enhalced the compensation amount of the deceased and the relevant pagraph No.5 reads as under for read reference

5. Ramachandrappa us. Manoger, RoyaL Sundaram Alliance Insurance Oompang Linited determined an income of Rs.4,50O/ - per month in the Aear 2004 for a coolie. A Constitution Bench in National Insuronce Compony Limited us. Pranag Sethi and Others found that there uould be an incrementaL increase in the income u.thich according to us tuould be reasonable if frxed at Rs.SOO/- per month for euery successlve gear. In tlle present cose, the accident occuned in the gear 2015, 11 tlears aJter 2O04 and going bg the pinciples 8 2025 SCC Online SC 1092 :.--.. t4 Iil.A.C-M.A-No.57 of 2020 stated iL tlrc aJbrL:-cited riecislons the oppellart, 1', L,ttskil[ed ruorker tuould be cntitlecl lo claim tnonlhllt irrcotne o/ R.s ' r t )()O,/ -" 25 In vies r>f rccc'r'rt jurigment. clatecl 1-',.O5 -' .)5, passccl br rl-tir Hon'blc Supremc Corrrt in Shatkh Sadtk Shaik Il tfiqse's case (citecl aboi,e) and thc lacl that deceased has not filed ar \ incomc prool artcl Iooking at the avocation of the deceased, this Cour s; ir-rclirtecl to rcclLlc€l thc income of the deceased grarted by the Tribunai i-om Rs. 16,000/ to Rs.10,000/ pcr month. In Latha Wadhwa us. t tdte of Bihaf , the Hon'bie Apex Court l-reld that even u'hen there is ,'t: lrroof ol tttcome altcl carnings, the income can be reasonablv est rt ttecl ancl assessecl considering the ground realities bv the Courts. Ac< rrdinglv, this Court u'ould take the notional income of the decease.c li Rs.1O,000/- per nronth lor re-assessment ol the compensation

26. The compensation arnoLtnt which \.\. j granlcd undel conventional heads is in the iight of the pronouncc tcnt oljudgment in Sarla Verrna a. Delhi Transport Corporatior'1) Magma General Insttrance Cornpang Limlted Vs.Nanu Ratn alis )huhnt Rcmrr and the same needs no interference by this Court. Thr: I irrned Tribunal has added 30% future prospects to the income of the (l <:cased, however as I 2001(8) SCC 197 '' 2009 ACI 1298 (sc) Lr2018 ( 18) scc 130 15 M.A.C.M.A.No.57 of 2O2O per the full bench Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pranag Sethi's case (cited above), the future prospects of age group of 50 to 60 years prescribed as 10o/o but the leerrned Tribunal has erroneously added 30% to the future prospects.

27. On overall re-appreciation of the pleadrngs, material on record and the larv laid dou,n by the Honble Supreme Court in the aforesaid cited decision. The compensation amount is modified and recalculated for the reasons stated above and given in the table belou, lor easy reference. 28 . As per the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in Pranag Sethi and others (cited aboue) and considering the age of the deceased 55 years which is not disputed by either of parties, additional 10% of the income has to be added towards future prospects to the monthly income of the deceased. Therefore, the monthly income of the deceased would come to Rs.11,000/ (Rs.1O,000/- + Rs.1,0O0/ ). The annual incorne of the deceased would come to Rs.1,32,000/- (Rs. 11,O00/- X 12) and, out of which, 1/3 has to be deducted towards the personai expenses of the deceased, as there was three dependant on the deceased as claimed by the claimants at the time of the accident. Then the actual alnual income would come to Rs.88,000/- (Rs.1,32,000/- (-) Rs.aa,aOO/-) 16 !{.4-qU.A.No.57 of 2o2o

29. As per the column No.4 of scheduie hxed ir he juclgrnent of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma,s case (cited above). ier.l cotrsirlering tl,rr, age of the deccased :rs 55 1.ears, the appropriate rntr , piier applicable for the age group of 50 t. 55 l,ears, as the age ol dece,r ;r:d *,as .5S vears .s on thc clate of the acciclent, the relevant multiplier .,tr_rld be ,11,. the total loss of depenclencS, q,ould come to Rs.9,(;il C,O0,i (Rs.gg,0OO/_ x 11) Thr-rs. Head Amount arrived at by the Tribunal T ai" ) rrt aEived at by this Court Notional Income o[ thc dcccased Loss of Estatc L Lctss o[ Consorlium Funeral Expcnses Rs.18,30,457l Rs. 15,000/ Rs.40,0OO/ - Rs. 15,00O/ i .I,6a,ooo/ s.l5.OO01 s 40,000/ I .r 15,0O0/- 'lota1 ).9,OO,457 - I ).3a,ooo/_

30. Hence, the claimants/ respondents herern compensation of Rs.1O,gg,gOO/_ (Rupees Ten Thousand and Nine Hundred Rupees onlyf, ar: er-rtitled for an Lu :hs Thirty Eight

31. Accordingly, tl-re M.A.C.M.A is allowed in parr by reducing the compensation from Rs. 19,00,457/_ to Rs. 1O,38,9OC,, - u.ith ipterest (4 the date ,r- realizatior-r. The p.a. from the date of petition till B t7 M.A.C.M.A.No,57 of 2020 respondents therein are directed to deposit the said amount together u,ith costs and interest alter gir.ing d ue credit to the amount already dcposited, if anr', q,ithin a period of tn'o months from the receipt of a copy of this judgment. The compensation amount shall be apportioned among the respondents/claimants in tl-re same manner and ratio as ordered by the learned Tribunal. On such deposit, the claimants are permitted to s,ithdra$, the same rvithouL ir-rrnishing any surety. However, it is made clear that, if rhe claimants had already v",ithdrawn the excess compensation amount, if an1,, the appellar-rt-insurance company is not entitled to recover the same from the claimants. There shall be no order as to costs

32. Miscellaneous petitions, if any are pending, shall stand closed. Sd/. MOHD. ISMAIL DEPUTY REGISTRA //TRUE COPYii ECTION OFFICER ge(F XIV Addl Chief Jud CC to SRl. A RAM AKR CC to SRl. M LINGAM Advocate IoPUCI CD Copies TC), City Civil Court, Hydbrabad ISHNA REDDY Advocate loPUCl I \ To,

1. The 2. One 3. One 4. Two GE/kam t^ ALt.z v :., HIGH COURT DATED:2910712025 JUDGMENT MACMA.No.57 ot 2020 1 I .;ATE Q t s ttas tu$ I { : * '.1.._ PARTLY ALLOWING MACMA WITHOUT COSTS /( l () ? IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD 134431 TUESDAY,THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 57 OF 2020 Between: TATA AIG General lnsurance Co. Ltd.,, Represented by its Manager, My Home Tycoon, 2nd Floor, Begumpet, Hyderabad ...APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NO.2 AND

1. Bacham Gari Laxmi, W/o Late B. Dasharath Reddy, Age- 45 years, Occ- Household,

2. B. Shankaramma, W/o Late B. Ramachandra Reddy, Age- 68 years, Occ- Nil

3. B. Nageshwar Reddy, S/o Late B. Dasarath Reddy, Age- 20 years, Occ- Nil All are Rl/o Koukuntla Villagem Chevella lMandal, Ranga Reddy District.

4. M/s. Premier Travels, Represented by lv{r. Syed Sarosh, R/o H.No.13-6- 4341A133, KMG Paragi, Maruthinagar, Ring Road, Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad Respondent Nos.1 to 3/ Petrtioners ...RESPONDENT NO.4/ RESPONDENT NO.1 Appeal filed under Section 173 of M.V.Act, against Order and Decree dated 1110912019 passed in O.P.No. 2344 OF 2012 an the file of the Court of the XIV Additional Chief Judge (FTC), City Civi! 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 argument of SRl. A. RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, *Y Advocate for the Appellants and SRI M. LINGAIV NARAyAti \ Advocate appeared for Respondent No.1 to 3 and none appeared for Responden ,Jc.4. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

1. That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal ; : and is hereb y partly a llowed

2. That the compensation amount be and is lr, reby Rs.19,00,4571 to Rs.10,38,900/- with interest @ B "i p a. petition till the date of realization. reduced from from the date of 3 That the respondents therein are drrected to deposit tl r l;aid amornt together with costs and interest after givrng due credit tc, the amount aiready deposited, if any, within a period of two months from I e receipt of a copy oi this judgment.

4. That the compensation amount shall be app r lioned among the respondents/claima nts in the same manner and rai I as ordered by the learned Tribunal. On such deposit, the claimants are rr-.rmitted to withdraw the same without furnishing any surety.

5. That the claimants if had already withdrawn the, r xcess compensation amount, if any, the appellant-insurance company is I e reby not entifled to recover the same from the claimants.

6. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal lffrue Copyll Sd/. MOHD. ISMAIL : :PUTY REggtBAR- IiECTION OFFICER To 'l . The XIV Additionat Chief Judge (FTC), City Civil Cour Hyderabad 2. Two CD Copies. GE/kam W HIGH COURT DATED:29/0712025 DECREE MACMA.No.57 of 2020 PARTLY ALLOWING MACMA WITHOUT COSTS I 5 ).