The High Court · 2025

in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to :: . -1''. ' : : _ ... grant interim stay of the judgment and decree of the MACT-cum-lX Additional District Judgrr at Kamareddy dt. 1710612014 made in OP.NO. 185 of 2012, pending disposal of the above MACMA Counsel for the Appellant : SRl. N VASUDEVA REDDY(SC FOR RTC) Counsel for the Respondents : G RAJESHWAR RAO The Court m;rde the following: JUDGMENT ,t ! IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY M.A.C.M.A.No.7 17 of 2O 19 DATE: O4.L2.2O25 Between: Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Rep. by its Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. (C)u,ner of the Bus bearing No. AP- L L /2-5646) and another Nuthikadi Laxmi and six others AND .Appellants Respondents JUDGMENT: The appellants-APsRTc prel'erred tiris appeai, under Section . 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challcnging the judgment and decree dated 17.06.2014 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-lX Additional District Judge at Kamareddy (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in O.P.No.185 of 2012, whereby the Tribunal awarded compensation o[ Rs.I2,35,OOO/- together with intere st @ 7 .5o/o per annum in favour of the claimants i.e., respondent Nos.l to 5 herein, being the dependents of the deceased.-l,ate Rajender, who died in a motor vehicle accident. 2

2. The brief flacts of the case are that on 07.04.2010, the deceased u,as trave lling in an auto bearing registration No.AP-15/X-1454 from Machareddy to Lrngampe t along with other perscns. At about l0:15 P.M.,'"r,hen the auto reached the limits of Ghanpur Village, a bus bearirrg No.AP-11 lZ-5646 (owned by the appellants-APsRTc) allegedly came or1 the \vrorlg side, at high speed, in rash and negli5;ent manner, and collided with the auto. As a resuit of the said collisron, tl-re auto \,vas cornpletell' damaged, and the deceased sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. A criminal case vide (lrime No.42 of 2010 was registered on the file ol Machareddy Police Station and after investigation, charge-sheet was submitted by the F,olice attributing negligence to both drivers of the colliding vehicies. stating that prior to the accident, the deceased was hale and healthy, working as gang man in R & B Department and earning salary of Rs.15,000/- per rncnth, and due to the sudden death of the deceased, they not only suffered mental agony but also lost the sourc3 of income, the clairrrants (respondent Nos.1 to 5 herein), being the wife, children and mother of the deceased Late Rajender, filed the aforesaid claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs. 15,00,OOO /- for death of the deceased.

3. Before the Tribunal, respondent Nos.3 and 4 i.e., owner and driver of the auto remained ex parte. Respondent Nos. l and. 2- l 5 APSRTC (appellants herein) i.e, owner of the bus contested the claim petition by denying negligence on part of the bus driver and contending that sole negiigence was on the part of the auto driver. They further contend.ed they were not liable and that the claim was excessive and preryed to dismiss the claim petition.

4. The Tribunal, after hearing the parties and perusing oral and documentary er,,idence, held that the accident was caused due to the composite negligence of the drivers of both vehicles and accordingly directed joint and several liability of both the appellant and the auto owner/driver. Further, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.12,35,O00/- with interest at 7.5oh per annum in favour of the claimants-respondent Nos.1 to 5 herein. Challenging the said judgment and decree, the appellants-APsRTC filed the present appeal.

5. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. So far as negligence and liabilit5r are concerned, a careful examination of the impugned judgment reveals that the police, after investigating the accident vide Crime No.42 of 2010, submitted a charge-sheet against both the bus driver and the auto driver, finding negligence on part of both vehicles. Further, there is also eyewitness 4 eviderce {PW-2), though injured, that implicates both the vehicies and the bus driver (RW-1) did not conclusivel-v clear himself of guilt. The iact that thc auto r',,as uninsrrred or unlicensed does not autor:ratic:zrlly shilt sole liabilitl,to the auto driver nor does it negate the duty or liability of a driver whose negligence contributed to the accid,:nt. 'lhus, the Tribunal's finding that there was composite negliglencc' is therefore sustainable.

7. As regards the assessment of quantum of compensation is conce rned, the claimants procluced Ex.A7 salary certificate, which show,; tha.t the deceased u,as getting net salary of Rs.12,5151-, aod no contrary or rebuttal evidcncc lvas placed by appellants. Therefore, the 'lribr,rnal rightly arrived at a notional monthly income of Rs.9,t)00/- after due deductions, cleducted one-fourth for personal living cxpenscs arrd applit:d appropriate multiplier "15", which is consistent with standard practice in fatal accident claims. Further, the arrounts granted by the 'l'ribunal under conventional heads i.e., loss c,f consortiurn, funeral expenses, loss of estate were reasonable. Thus, having regarcl to tl're totality of evidence and circumstances, this oourt does not find anv justifiable reasons to interfere with the impullned award passed by the Tribunal. This appeal is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. I ! { I I 5

8. In the resnlt, this appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs i\s a sequei, the rniscellaneous pctitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/: A.H.S.GOWRI SHANKAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 //TRUE COPY/ SECTION OFFICER

1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-Cum-lx Additional District Judge at Kamareddy.(with records if any)

2. One CC to-SRl. N VASUDEVAREDDY(SC FOR RTC)Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRI G RAJESHWAR RAO Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies GE/PSL A \ To, HIGH COUR]' DATED:04112).12025 ORDER MACMA.No.i'17 of 2019 / I 3 e 0 LJ 1 [ \\[q ?tt$ G .b .s * DISMISSING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT [ 32e6 I THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 717 OF 2019 Between:

1. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Rep. by its Managing Director, Mushe.erqpad, Hyderabad. (Ownei of the Bus bearing No.AP-1 1lZ'5646)

2. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Rep. by its Depot Manager, Yadagirigutta Depot, Nalgonda District. ...APPELLANTS/ResPondents 1 & 2 AND

1. Nuthikadi Laxmi, Wo. Late Rajender, Age:38 ye?ts,Occ: Household, R/o. Machareddy (Village & Mandal), Nizamabad District.

2. Nuthikadi Uma Maheshwari, D/o. late Rajender, aged about 22 years, Occ: Houshold, R/o. Machareddy (Village & Mandal), Nizamabad District.

3. Nuthikadi Naveen Kumar, S/o. Late Rajender, aged about'19 years, Occ. student, R/o. Machareddy (Village & Mandal), Nizamabad District.

4.' Nuthikadi Harish, S/0. Late Rajender, Aged aboutlS years, occ: Student, R/o. Machareddy (Village & Mandal), Nizamabad District.

5. Nuthikadi Gangavva, wo. Late Pochaiah, aged about 65 years, Occ: Household, R/5. Machareddy (village & Manrcal), Nizamabad District. ... RESPON DENTS/Petitioners Appeal filed under Section 173 of M.V.Act, aggrieved by the order and decree dated dated 17.06.2012 passed in O.P.No.185 of 2012 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 SRI N. VASUDEVA REDDY, Advocate for the Apperllants and SRI G.RAJESHWAR RAO Advocate appeared for Respondents. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

1. That ttre Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and is hereby dismissed.

2. That the re shall be no order as to costs in this appeal lffrue Copyll SD/. A.H.S.GOWRI SHANKAR ASSISTANT REGISTRARG SECTION OFFICER To Kamareddy. (with records if any)

1. The Molor Accident Claims Tribunal-Cum-lX Additional District Judge at 2. Two CD Copies. GE/PSL o. I i i ^t I I i i I I HIGH COURT DATED:0411212025 DECREE MACMA.N o.717 of 2019 DISMTSSING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS I