The Hon,ble Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd v. pranay Sethir held that while considering the compensation in cases of death, the

Counsel for the Appellants: SRl. CHILUMALA PRATAP REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: NONE APPEARED Counsel for the Respondent No. 2: SRI KOTA SUBBA RAO The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO JUDGMENT: M.A.C.M.A.No.343 of 2o25 The appellants, who are wife, children and mother of the deceased, have filed this appeal against the Order and Decree dated 22.O2.2O13 in O.P.No. i47 of 2071 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional District Judge (FTC), at Siddipet (for short .the tribunal,), whereunder the tribunal has granted an amount of Rs. 19,83,500/- towards compensation along with interest @ g% per annum as against the claim of Rs.45,00,OOO/- on account of the death of the deceased in the accident occurred on

22.06.20r1.

2. Heard Sri P. Sriharinath, learned counsei representing Sri C. Pratap Reddy, learned counsel for the appellants, and Sri Kota Subba Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

3. Brief facts ofthe case:

3.1. On 22.06.2011, at about 3 pM, the deceased was proceeding to Hyderabad from his village on a motor cycle bearing No.AP 10 AN 9022 for distribution of wedding cards and while returning to his village, he reached in front of pepsi 2 ISR, I MACMA 343_2025 Company Gate-2, on NH-9 in the outskirts of Sangareddy Town, at that time, driver of the lorry bearing No'AP 29 TA 7379 driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner came on to the road in reverse direction from the Pepsi company gate across NH-9 ali of sudden and dashed to the deceased's motor cycle, due to which the deceased sustained grievous injuries on vital parts, immediately he was shifted to Government Hospital, Sangareddy in 108 ambulance and he died while undergoing treatment'

4. Subrrissions of learned couns eI for the arrpellants:

4.1. Learned counsel for the appellants vehemently contended that the appellants claimed an amount of Rs.45,00,000/- under various heads and to establish their claim, appellant No 1 examined herself as PW.1 and examined PWs'2 and 3 and marked Exs.Al to Al2. The tribunal without properly considering the same awarded meager amount of Rs.19,83,500 l-. He further submits that the deceased was working as fitter, and drawing an amount of Rs'39,4811- per month and the tribunal has not awarded any amount towards future prospects, loss of dependency, transportation charges as well as other amounts claimed in the O.P. 3 Is& I MACMA 343-2025

5. Submissions ofle arned counsel for respoadent No.2

5.I Per contra, Iearned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 vehemently submitted that the tribunal after considering the oral and documentary evidence on record has rightly awarded an amount of Rs.19,83,5OO/_ and. the appellants are not entitled for enhalcement of compensation.

6. Analvsis of the case:

6.i. This Court considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and perused the material available on record. It is not in dispute that the deceased died on 22.06.2011, due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.l. It is also not in dispute that the deceased was employee and as per the salary certificate, Ex.A8, he is receiving salary of an amount of Rs.39,48 1/- per month. Hence, this Court is inclined to consider the income of the deceased as Rs.39,4g 1. After deducting Rs.31,377 income tax, total comes to Rs.4,42,395/ - (39,481xI2-31,372). The Hon,ble Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. pranay Sethir held that while considering the compensation in cases of death, the future ' 2ot7 (6) 170 (sc) 1 4 ]SR, I MACMA 343_2025 prospects of the self employed shall a-lso be considered. Having regard to the age and occupation as self-employed, if 15 percent of the income is included as future prospects, the monthly income would come to Rs.5,08,754 l-$,42,395+66,359). As the dependants are five members, 1/4tn of the income has to be deducted towards personal expenditure, as per law laid down in Smt. Sarla Varma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporationz- Thus, the annual contribution of the deceased to the appellants would be of Rs.3,Bl,566l- F,O8,754-1,27,188). As per his age i.e.52 years as on the date of accident, the appropriate multiplier would be '1 1', the total amount comes to Rs.41,97 ,226 /- (3,81,566x11). The appellants are entitled for the said amount under the head of loss of dependency. The appellants are entitled for an amount of Rs. 1,93,600 I - towards loss of consortium and Rs.36,3OO/- towards funeral expenses. Accordingly, the appellants are granted total compensation amount of Rs.44,27,126 I - e|,97,226+ 1,93,600+36,300). In the result, the M.A.C.M.A is allowed in part, enhancing 7. the compensation amount granted by the tribunal to the appellants from Rs. 1 9,83, 5O0/ - to Rs. 44,27, 1 26/ -(Rupees forty (2009) 6 s.c.c. 121 'z i 5 ISR,I MACMA_343-2025 four lakhs twenty seven thousand one hundred and twent5z six only). The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till realization. The enhanced amount shall be deposited by respondent Nos.1 and 2 lointly and severally within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The appellants are entitled to the apportionment of the amount as directed by the Tribunal. On such deposit, the appeliants are permitted to withdraw the amount without furnishing any security. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs. SD/. MOHD.ISMAIL DEPUTY REGISTRAR \ I To, //TRUE COPY// SECTI OFFICER Judge (FTC) at Siddipet l The chairman Motor Accident craims Tribunar cum rV Additionar District 2. One CC to SRL CHILUMALA pRATAp REDDy AdVocate [OpUC] 3. One CC to SRt. KOTA SUBBA RAO Advocate tOpUCl 4. Two CD Copies BAJPSL HIGH COURT J\ DATED:0310112025 JUDGMENT+DECREE MACMA.No.343 ot 2025 ...', 1r\t t ,-) { 1\$ "Y '..t, (,':i i' * \\ () O \lSLI * NESP 2 DRAFTS M.A.C.M.A. IS ALLOWED IN PART b a q )K IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO MOTOR ACCIDENT C IVIL MISCELLANEOU S APPEAL No 343 0F 2025 Between: 1 2 3 4 5 Occ. Now o i i, n,{.ii,i o i'ili Smt. Sajeeda Begum. Wo._ Late fvld. Osman, Aged .47 years, Househotd, R/o. M-atkaour.Viilage, Ko;Aapri ffiiiori Medak District residing at Chebrti Viila je, Jagadlrpuiurinta r, rrlllol[' oi.tri.t. Sri. Md. Rafeeq, S/o. Late y9 9rfgl, Aged 27 years, Occ. Student, R/o. Uf, ffi T,UX,iS,i #",il:fi SIi M.! "[ Sri... Md. faleed, Sio. Iate Md. Osman, Aged 25 years, Occ. Student, R/o. y,fi[Tll,Ul'5ffi#"^Hfi5:; U:Ul'iXi*ttoii".il'r"i, i*ioi,g "i'ch"[Xi Kum. Maleeda Bequm. D/o. Late Md. Osman, Aged 22 years, Occ. Student. R/o. Matkapur Viti-aoe. Kondap* rr,lrOir, rrr;;["D;ir,i"i. N'";;;"tffi ,;i Chebrti Vittage, Jaga?evpur Mdndat. frrr"ori rjiiti[i. "' Smt. Moureem Bee. Wo. Late Madar Sahb, Aged 77 years, Occ. Nil, All are R/o. Markapur Viilaoe. Kondipri M;rdri. 'M"l"r"r'oirtri"t. Chebrti Vittage, Jasa"devpur rujntal.'Hlleiii 6;;ffii "'' Now residing at i. g,i'c h "r.r o* ",-"o "i . AND 'I . Sri. K. Sudhakar Reddy, S]9 Ram Reddy, Aged Major, Occ. Owner of Lorrv No. Ap 2e TAz37e. R/o ptot ruo. ro. Vr,icr< &61a, 6pri W"i";i;;[, h;i;', Nagar, Hayathnagar, RangaredOy Oiitiict. ...APPELLANTS/CLAIMANTS ' '-

2. \lls. Royal Sundaram Allianz General lnsurance Co. Ltd, Rep. by its 1ta.n g9!I, Su b rama nyam. e u ito i ng, 2 no riooi, r.t-o- r .r u u tio riE,i,r j]nn n, Satai, Chennai, Tamilnadu State_-OOO OOZI- ' -" ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDNETS Appeal under section 173 of Motor Vehicres against the judgment and decree in M.v.o.p. No. 147 of 2o11 aatea zaoztioig, on the fire of court of the chairman Motor Accident craims Tribunar cr, -rv ruin, (FTC) at Siddipet. Additionar oi.iri"t - This Appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the. grounds of appeal, the judgment andbecree of the Lbwer court and the material papers in hearing the arguments of Sri Chilumala Pratap Reddy iti" Advocate for Appellants and oi sri. Koti subba Rao Advocate for Respondent No.2 and None Appeared for Respondent No 1' "rr" ,nO -rpon This Court doth order and decree as follows: annum from the date of claim petition till realization;

1. That the Motor Accident civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and hereby is allowed i;;a;, enhancing the compensation amount granted by the tribunal to the ti", fts. te,af,'soOl- to Rs44,27,126/-(Rupees fortv four lakhs "pi"rrl"ii twenty seven thousand one hundred and twenty six only); 2. That ihe enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest @ 7 '5'k per 3. That the enhanced amount shall be deposited by respondent Nos l and 2 " within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt i"i"tir ""J,everally of a copY of the iudgment; 4. That the appeliants are entitled to the apportionment of the amount as directed by'ihe Tribunal. On such deposit, the appellants are permitted to withdraw the amount without furnishing any security; 5. That save as aforesaid the decree of the Tribunal shall stands confirmed in all other resPects; and

6. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal SD/- MOHD.ISMAIL DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// sEcrkFFrcER To, l.TheChairmanMotorAccidentClaimsTribunalCumlVAdditionalDistrict Judge (FTC) at SiddiPet

2. One CC to SRl. CHILUMALA PRATAP REDDY Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRl. KOTA SUBBA RAO Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD CoPies BA HIGH COURT DATED:0310112025 DECREE MACMA.No.343 of 2025 M.A.C.M.A. IS ALLOWED IN PART &Irq Fr