The High Court · 2025

vears, occ:Asricu,ture, AND ...APPELLANTS/PETrT|oNERS

1. Dr. y Ranganayakulu, S/o y. Rangappa, owner of the Vehicle No.ApO9/U 3712 (Mlk Van), R/o H.NO.6_3_609/194, Anandanagar Cotony, Khairatabad, 2 The United rndia rnsurance co Ltd, Rep. by Divn. Manager Divisionar office Hyderabad. No.V, 2/A, Vengalaraonagar, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appeilant(s): SRl. yELLAPRAGADA Counsel for the RespondentrNo.l : Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SRl. K.S.N. MURTHI _ SRtN|VASA MURTHY The Gourt made the following: JUDGMENT (" TEE HONOURABLE M.A.c.M .A.No SMT' JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA 32A5 ol 2oo8 UDJ GMENT: This appcat is liled against the Order datecl 29'04'2005 in O.P.No.SO'/ ol 1999 passed by the learned Chairman' Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - Ill-Additionai District and Sessions .ludge , Mahabubnagar' at Gadwal

2. The petition uide O'l)'No 807 of 1999 was filed by the appellanrs / pe titioners claiming compensation of Rs'2'00'000/- lor the death ol thc dcceased Katika Gokari' who died in the motor \rchiclc accidcnt occurred on 04 O9' 1999' The trial Court gol examined P Ws i and 2 on behalf of appe llants/ pctitioners and marked Exs'A1 to A7 on their behalf andEx.Blrr,asmarkedonbehalfoftherespondents.Thetrial courl afterr considcring the oral and documentzrry evidence on rccord, dismissccl the petition on the ground thal appellan ts / pc litione rs failed to prove the rash and negligence driving of thc driver'of the vehick: Aggrieved by the said Order' petitioners ttrercin preferrccl the present appeal Seeking tO Set aside the Orcier of thc trial Court and to grant compensation. F 2

3. Parties hereinafter referred to as petitioners and respondents, as arrayed before the trial Court lor thc sakc of convenience. \\,AS

4. The brief facts of the case are that the deceased working as a Hamali for loading and unloading of mi.lk cans on the milk van bcaring No.Ap 09 U 3712, under the employment of respondent No.1. On O4.O9.t999, the deccasc<1 in thc capacity of Hamali along with driver and cleaner 14,619 proceeding with milk cans from Kurnool to Gadwal. Whcn they reached near KM stone No.1g2/g on NH.No .2, their lorry met with accident \,\,ith APSRTC bus bearing No.Ap fi/Z 1851. cluc to which the deceased, driver and cleaner of the lorry died on the spot. The police, Kondapur registered a case in cr.No.32 of 1999, under Section 304_4 of IpC and took up investigation. 5 Heard arguments of both sides and perused the entire record. 6 As per the record, the deceased was travelling as Hamali in a milk van bearing No.Ap O9 U 3T 12. When thev r.rrere proceeding on NH No.7, their van met with acciclent with A.PSRTC bus. Resp Ondents did not adduce anv cvrdencc an<l ) simply filed the copy ol the Insurance Policy and even in their counter they have not allegecl that APSRTC was not made as party to the O.P. As the petitioners are wife and parents of the deceased and as thc case pertains to the year 1999' this Court finds it rcasonable Lo convL-rt thc case inlo the petition under Section 163-A of M.V AcL, in r'r'hich case the petitioners need not prove the rash and negligence of the driver of the vehicle' As per the P.M.E reporl, thc deccased was aged abowt 22 1'ears As per second scheclulc o[ Section 163-A of M-V Act' considering the age of the deceased i-e., 22 years and the annual income of Rs.4O,0O0/-, thc multiplier can be considered as 17 and thus he is entitled for compensation oi lis 7,20,000i -' 7 . Besides, appcllants/ petitioners are also entitled for compensation under 'conve ntional heads' as prescribed in the dicLum of National Insurqnce Cornpang Linited Vs. Pranag Sethi, i.e., Rs.15,000/ torvards loss of Estate and Rs.15,000/- towards funeral charges. The appellant No. i /wife rs entitled for Rs.aO,0O0/ - under' spousal consortium. Therefore, "rppe Ilan ts/ peti tion ers are cntitjcd Convcntional heads,. tts.70,000f_ under 4

8. Further, ng Limited us. the Hon'ble Supreme Court, by reitcrating the compre hen sive lnte rpre tation o['consortium, grve n in the authority of Megmd. General frtsurance Compa Nanu Ram Atias Chuhru Rcrm &ofhersr, and i n thc authority between IJnited Indior fnsurance Compang Limited us. Satinder Kaur Qtt satwinder Kaur and. others2, fortified that the amounts lor loss of consortium shall be awarded Lo the children who lose the 621s and protection of their parents as 'parental consortium, and to the parents as, ,filial for the loss of thcir grown_up children, to compensate their agony, Iove and affection, care and companionship of deceascd children. Accordingly, it is just and reasonable to award Rs.4O,00O/ each to appellants/ pctitioners No.2 anci 3 unrjcr consortium, 'Filial Consortium,.

9. Therefore, pe titioners / claimants compep561i6p jn thr. following lerms: i Compensa Lion 2 Conventional heads Filial Consortiu;--- TOTAL '1zotr1 ra scc r:o ' 1zozo7 e scc e<+ are entitlecl for thc Rs.7,2O,OOO7- Rs.70,O00/- Rs.8O,00o/- Rs.8,7O,OOO/_ t I0. In the rcsult' the presenL appeal is allowed by setting aside the Order ol the trial Court da[ed 29 'O4 2OO5 and granted compensation ol IRs.B,70,0OO/' (ttupees Dight Lakhs Seventy Thousancl only) with lnte rest at Lhe rate ol 7 Suk per annum . from the date oi filing the petition tili the date of realization' Though, Respondcnts No 1 and 2 arc jointly and severally liable to pay compensatlon' respondent No'2/lnsurance Company is directed to deposrt the entire amount within a period of from thc d:rte of receipt of a copy of this onc month our of total corlpensation amounL appellants 3/parents are entitlcd t-o Rs'2'O0'0OO/- each appellant No' 1 / u'ifc is entitled for the balance on such deposit' appellants/ petitioners are permitted to withdrar'l' cntire amount along wittr interest accrued on it' Appellants/ pe trttone rs are also directed to pay the deficit Court fee on the enhanced amount There strall be no ordcr as to costs' No.2 and Judgment and the amou.nt. Miscellaneous Pe [i[ions Pending' il' anY, shall stand ..:1osed. \ sor-e.3gere;YA'=t[iR?I /'\" //TRUE COPY// \,1 SECTION OFFICER To, e0 1 2 4 The Chairman, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-lll-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar' at Gadwal One CC tO SRI. YELLAPRAGADA SRINIVASA MURTHY, AdVOCAtC [OPUC] one CC to qRJ. K..-9.N:t\ilURTHl, Advocate [OPUC] Two CDs CoPies. !:i \- s. k, HIGH COURT DATED:21l0312025 JUDGMENT MACMA.No.3285 of 2008 qlAiE 6 a o$ o ^r$\L. rs G) + ,1 DE ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS. 6 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR-THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD [32081 FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH '-'' TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry Fi'E PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA MOTO R ACCID ENT CIVI L MISCE LLANE APPE AL NO:32850 F 2008 Between: ' 3*,T-lifS"[3lX:'" Bee' wo Late K Gokari Househord, Aged about 20 yeas, 2. Katike Madar, Sio Katike Bade Sab, Aged about 40 years, Occ: Agriculture, Khaja Bee, wq Katike Madar sab, aged about 47 years, occ: ' fi[ljrsf,:i:: (All are R/o. Rajoli, Shantinagar Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.) AND ...APPELLANTS/PET|T|oNERS Hyderabad. ' 3irl.,fi iry"+*i',',JB l l?tgiigf i[ifJili!:,"si,s,i?,,].",,1 [i,'#, 2. The United lndia tn:ylgl." Co.Lrd Rep by Divn Manager Divisionat Office No.V, 2/A, Vengalaraonagar, HyOeraLIO.-, ",. ... RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Appear fired under Section 173 0f M,V-Act, against the decree and order in o P No'907 0f 'r ggg on the fire of the court of the Motor Accident craims Tribunar-cum-, Additionar, District and sessions Judge, Mahaboonagar at Gadwal dated 29.04.2005. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the judgment and Decree of the Lower court and the materiar papers in the case and upon hearing the arguments of SRr yELLA'RAGADA MURTHY' Advocate for the Apperant and none appeared for the Respondent No.1 and SRI K.S.N.MURTHy Appeared for Respondent No.2. SRTNT,ASA This Court doth Order and Decree as follows: l.ThattheMotorAccidentCivilMiscellaneusAppealbeandherebyisAllowed by setting aside the otO"i ot tne iriaf Court dated 29'04'2005 and granted ns a,z6,oooi- tn'p""t Eight Lakhs Seventv Thousand only) with rnterest at the rate oii SV" pui'nnum fr.om the date of filing the petition "l"iJ"'i."rtt" "t till the date of realization;

2. Tha the Respondents No.1 and 2 are hereby jointlv and severally liable to pay compensation, resiinaeni ru12rnt"'nt" cornp'ny and also hereby directed to deposit tne lntire amount within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment;

3. That out of total compensation amount Appellants No 2 and 3/parents are - and the appellant No 1/wife is entitled h"[ovl.iitl"J to n..),oo,oool- """r' for the balance amount;

4. That on such deposit the appellants/petitioners are hereby permitted to *itndrr* entire amount along with interest accrued on it;

5. That the Appellants/petitioners are hereby directed to pay the deficit Court fee on the enhanced amount; and

6. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal SD/-A.SREENIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR llTrueCopYll ! { L' sEcrtoN oFFlcER To 1 TheChairman,theMotorAccidentClaimsTribunal.cum.lll.AdditionalDistrict uno S"JJion. judge, Mahabubnagar, at Gadwal' Two CD CoPies. 2 G .> ) HIGH COURT DATED:21l0312025 DECREE MACMA.No.3285 of 2008 ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS.