The High Court · 2025

Judgment

1. n, Aged 35 years,Caste. Muslim, Occ.Driver of 8-4778, Rlo. H..No.10-13-290/2, Dharmuri Hills,

4. Shaik Azam, S/o Shaik Moin, Aged ma.lor ,Caste. lvlustim, Occ. Business cum Owner of TATA Ace bearing No.TS-1d-UB-4778, Rio. H. No.10-13-1441123tC YgnSqL Bqo Colony, Near New Bridge Shivaji nagar , 5.0, Nizamabad town and Dist.-503001. 1 F Betvveen: *."diiEEi+oJ['.Tlti

1. Somiri Balavantha Rao, S/o Balayya , Aged 52 years, Occ.Nil, 2. Somiri Santha Bai, Wo Somiri Balavantha Rao, Aged 47 yeats, Occ.Household. PgF. ryo H.No.2-59, Vajjepalli Village of Sadashivangar Mandat, Kamredyy District. And ... . Petitioners/Respondents

1. Cholamandalam MS General lnsurance Co, Ltd.,, rep., bv its Divisional Manaoer. 1-2-7312 and 1-2-63 to 64, No.302,3rd Flobr, SR Arcade, parkta-ne, Secunderabad, Telangana - 500003. .... RespondenUAppellant

2. Shaik Arif, S/o Shaik Moinuddin, Aqed 35 TATA Ace bearing No.TS-16-UB-4778, R/o Nizamabad-503001 . years,Caste. Muslim, Occ.Driver of H. No.10-13-290/2, Dharmuri Hills,

3. Shaik Azerm, S/o Shaik Moin, Aged major ,Caste. Muslim, Occ. Business cum Owner of TATA Ace bearing No.TS-1d-UB-477A, Rio. H. No.10-1 3-144t123tc Yglggl_ BiLo Colony, Near New Bridge Shivaji nagar, 5.0, Nizamabad town and Dist.-503C01. (R2, R3 are formal parties) .... Respondents/Respondents

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to VACATE the interim Oder dated 28.09.2022 in tA NO: 3 OF 2022 in M.A.C.M.A No. 532 of 2022 and dismiss the M.A.C.M.A No. 532 ol 2022. 2022 Petition under Section '151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased To grant STAY of all further proceedings in pursuance of the order and the decree dated 27.01 2022 passed in OP No.46 of 2020'by the Motor Accident Ctaims Tribunal- Cum-lX Additional District Judge at Kamareddy pending disposal of the above appe:rl. Counsel for the Appellant : SRl. T. MAHENDER RAO Counsel for the Respondents No.l and 2 : SRI T SRUJAN K Counsel forthe Respondents No.3 and 4: - The Court r,,ade the following: JUDGMENT UMAR REDDY THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO M.A.C. No.532 of 2 JUDGMENT: This MACMA is fired by the Insuraace company assa,ing the Award, dt-27.or.2022, in MVop.No.46 of2o2o on the fire of the chairman, Motor Accidents claims Tribunal-cum-IX Additional District Judge at Kamareddy.

2. For the sake of co^venience, the parties will hereinafter be referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal.

3. I'he brief facts of the case are that, the craimants, who are the parents of the deceasecl somiri sahender, filecl a petition under section 166 (1) (c) of the Motor vehicles Act, 1ggg, claiming compensation of Rs.25,o0,oo0/- for the death of their son in a road accident that took place on 07.09 .2org. on the fateful d.y, at about 19.30 hrs, when the deceased ivas travelling as a pillion rider on the motor cycre, succumbed to injuries and the rider of the motor cycle also sustained grievous injuries. 2

4. Or L the complaint of the 1"t claimant, a crime was registere,d against the driver of the offending vehicle and after investigrttion, charge sheet was also filed.

5. It ls the case of the claimants that prior to the accident, the dec,:ased was hale & healthy and apart from studying Degree .[I year, was also doing agriculture and milk vending businesr; and was earning Rs.10,000/- per month. On account of death of the deceased, the petitioners lost their son. The l"t respondr:nt being the driver and 2nd respondent being the owner, and 3'd respondent being insurer of the offending vehicle are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation.

6. The Tribunal after due enquiry and examining the evidence available on record, held that the accident has occurrei due to the rash and negligent driving of the 1"t respondt:nt-driver and awarded an amount of Rs.16,46,312/- with inte:rest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of reaJization, fixing joint and several liability on respondt:nts No.1 to 3.

7. Lerrned counsel appearing for the appelrant-Insurance q-l.# compan)' would submit that the compensation awarded by the 3 Tribunal is excessive and exorbitant; that the T.ribunal erred in awarding compensation to the claimants without any material evidence, by erroneously taking the income of Rs.9,720 /- pe, month, adding thereto 4oo/o towards future prospects and applying multiplier of 'L9', instead of taking multiplier ,lg, and also awarding rate of interest @ T .So/o per annum instea d of 6oh, as considred by the Hon'lcle Supreme court in sarla vq.rtnq. qnd others a. Delhi Transport corporation and qnothert; and that the amount awarded by the Tribunal of Rs.4o,oo o /- to the claimants towards loss of consortium is contrary to law laid down by the Apex court in scrrla vertna case (l supra) and prayed to set aside the impugned award.

8. on the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the claimants contended that the Tribunar was justified in awarding the compensation and interference of this court is unwarranted, and prayed to sustain the same by dismissing the present appeal.

9. The undisputed facts are that the deceased was a bachelor aged L9 yea-rs and studying II year. The learned standing counsel for the Insurance company did not dispute 'zoog licl tzgg 4 the findings of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle and the said vehicle is validly insured with the

3.d respondent. He however disputes the manner in which the calculations were made in granting just and proper compensir.tion awarded to the claimants.

10. A prerusal of the impugned award would show that as rightly contended by the appellant-insurance company, the Tribunal while relying on the law laid down by the erstwhile High Cotrrt of AP in Settg Chandra Sekhar a. Mohd Ghousez wherein income of a graduate was taken @ Rs. I2,OOO /- p.m., with dedrrction of 1O%o for every preceding year, has erroneously applied a. l0% deduction instead of.2oo/o, although the deceased was studying Degree II year. 1 l. Thus, after deducting 2OVo out of Rs. 12,000 /-, tlne 1oss of income of the deceased as on the date of his death, would be Rs.9,600/- per month. Since the deceased was a student, the Tribunal was justilied in awarding future prospects @ 4Oo/o and. by adding 4Oo/o of future prospects i.e., Rs.3,g4O/.p.m., the notional monthly income of the deceased comes to Rs. 13,440/_ (Rs.9,600/- + Rs.3,840/-). zooe 1o; eLo rt+ '? 5 L2. Since the deceasect was a bachelor, the Tribunal was .justified in deducting 5Oo/o tor,vards his personal expenses. Thus, after deducting 5OoA, the loss of contribution of the deceased to his family would be Rs.6,72Ol-p-m-

13. The Tribunal though justilied in taking the age of the deceased while determining the multiplier, has rvr<lngly applied a multiptier of '19'insteacl of '18'as laid down by the Supreme Court in Sorrla Vertnq, ccuse (1 supra), and by applying the multiplier '18', the total loss of earnings of the deceased amounts to Rs. 14,5L,520/-(Rs.6,72O /- x 12 x 18).

14. Further, the amount of Rs.40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal to each of the claimants towards loss of consortium and Rs.15,0001- towards funeral charges, appears to be reasonable and needs no interference. In addition to the above, the claimants are also entitled to an amount of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate, which is not disputed by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant-lnsurance ComPanY.

15. As regards the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal @ T.5o/o per annum on the Eoffipensation awarded from the date of 6 petition till the date of teaJization, the same is found to be just, reasonable, and does not warrant any interference.

16. Thus, the total compensation payable to the claimants under various heads is quantified as under: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Income of the deceased Income with future Prospects @4O% Personal Expenses Applicable MultiPlier Total Loss of DePendency Consortium Loss of Estate Funeral Expenses Total Compensation

10. Rate of Interest Rs.9,6O0/-p.m. (Rs.12,000 - 2oo/o) Rs.13,44Ol- (Rs.9600 + Rs.3,840) Rs.6,72Ol- (Rs.13,440 - 5O%) .1gt Rs. 14,51,5201- (Rs.6720x12x18) Rs.80,OOO/- (Rs.4O,OOO x2l Rs.15,OOO/- Rs.15,OOO/- Rs.15,61 ,52O1- (d,7,5o/o 17 . Ac,:orclingly, the MACMA is partly allowed, modifying the Award ,:f the Tribunal, by reducing the total amount of compenr;ation payable to the claimants from Rs.16,46,312/- to Rs.15,61 ,52O/- with interest @ 7.5o/o p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization, payable by respondents No.1 to 3 jointly and severally. 7

18. The insurance cornpany is directed to deposit the conrpensation amount as directed above, within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

19. The claimants are entitled to the said amount in the same proportion as ordered by the Tribunal in MVoP.No.46 of 2o2o As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// To, Kamaredd v

1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal- Cum-lX 2. One 3. One 4. Two GE/PSL (with CC to S RI. T CC to SRl. T CD Copies ?r^q, SD/. M JAWAHAR REDDY ASSISTANT REGTSTRAR SECTION OFFICER al District Judge at UC] HIGH COUFIT DATED:2610912025 JUDGMEN'I' MACMA.No.532 ot 2022 j- Nrt }'r.. -:,. : I tt $\\t .,.,.'l i. PARTLY AI.LOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS a H I 2ll-8' IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD MONDAY,THE TWENTY SIXTY DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT [ 348s I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO MOTO ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCE LLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 5320F 2022 Between: Cholamandalam MS General lnsurance Co, Ltd.,, rep-, by ts Divisional Manager, 1.- i-lZtZ and 1-2-63 to 64, No.302, 3rd Floor, SR Arcade' Parklane, secunderaoao' Telangana - 500003 ...A''ELLANT/RE''.NDENT No.3 AND 1 . Somiri Balavantha Rao, S/o Balayya , Aged 54 years, Caste Arya Kshatritya, Occ. Nil,

2. Somiri Santha Bai, Wo Somiri Balavantha Rao, Aged 49 years, Caste Arya Kshatritya, Occ.Household Both R/o H.No.2-59, Vajjepalli Village of Sadashivangar Mandal, Kamredyy District. ... RespondenuPetitioners Nizamabad-503001 . - iArA ACi oliring No.is-to-ua-az7e, R/o.'H No.10-13-290/2, Dharmuri Hills, 3. Shaik Arif' S/o Shaik Moinuddin, Agqd 35 years,Caste. Muslim,-occ.Driver.. of ' 3m*,-"iT^fl" fA" ["y.",,lt' ft S?ti 3t?ie-???'3 Hits] [ 3.i! .it:''i^T,i rJ,8 V"'is; A-.16 c6rbnv,-lteai Ndw Bridge Shivaji nagar , s.0' Nizamabad town and Dist -5o3oo1 ...RESP.NDENTS/ RESPONDENT NOS'1 & 2 Appeal filed under Section 173 of M.V.Act, against Order and Decree dated 27 .01.2022 passed in M.V.O. P. No. 46 of 2O2O on the file of the court of the Motor Accident claims Tribunal- cum-lX Additional District Judge at Kamareddy. 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 T. MAHENDER RAO, Advocate for the App,ellant and sri r. Srujan Kumar Reddy, Advocate appeared for Respondent No.1 & 2 and none appeared for Respondent No.3 & 4. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows: 1 That :he [Motor Accident civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and is hereby parfly allowr-'d

2. That the compensation awarded be and is hereby reduced from Rs.1€,46,312t- to Rs.15,61 ,szot- with interest @ 7.so/o p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization, payable by respondents No.1 to 3 joinly and severally.

3. That the insurance company be and is hereby directed to deposit the compensation amount as directed above, within a period of two (02) months from lhe date of receipt of the copy of the order.

4. That lhe claimants be and are hereby entitled to the said amount in the same proportion as ordered by the Tribunal in MVop.No.46 of 2020. 5 That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. lllrue Copyll SD/. M JAWAHAR REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SEGTION OFFICER To 1' The Mlotor Accident Claims Tribunal- Cum-lX Additional District Judge at 2. Two CD Copies. Kamareddy.(with record if any) GE/PSL w^. HIGH COURT DATED:2610912025 DECREE MACMA.No.S32 ot 2022 li- i - I I i I t * (-) t- THE S 5ti i1I t i{ 7 |,l2f, t PARTLY ALLI)WING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS 1q\r,\o6'