Telangana High Court
Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Co. ... vs Ausala Sachin on 27 December, 2023
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
M.A.C.M.A.NO.1242 OF 2023
JUDGMENT:
Heard learned counsel Sri A.Ramakrishna Reddy for the appellant-insurance company and Sri. N.Srushman Reddy learned counsel for respondents-claimants.
2. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant/ insurance company challenging the award passed by the Chairman, Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (I Additional District Judge, Nizamabad (for short, 'Tribunal') in M.V.O.P.No.380 of 2020, dated 30.11.2022, thereby seeking to set-aside the award against the insurance company.
3. The brief factual matrix of the present appeal is as under.
4. On 06.07.2020 at 10.30 a.m., while the Smt. Ausala Dhanalaxmi (hereinafter referred to 'deceased'), was proceeding from Aryanagar to Subashnagar to attend her office on her Scooty bearing registration No.TS-16-EK-4093 and when she reached Court chowrastha, one Ashok Leyland mini goods vehicle bearing registration No.TS-16-UB-3527 came from LNA,J MACMA No.1242 of 2023 2 behind in rash and negligent manner and dashed the scooty of the deceased. Due to which, deceased fell down on the road and sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, she was shifted to Medicover Hospital, Nizamabad, where she succumbed to injuries on 08.07.2020 while undergoing treatment. The Police, I Town P.S., Nizamabad registered a case in Crime No.239/2020 under Section 337 IPC and later altered to 304-A IPC against the driver of the offending vehicle and filed charge sheet.
5. The claimants, i.e., respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein , who are children of the deceased, have filed claim petition against owner, driver of the vehicle and insurance company under Section 166(1)(c) of Motor Vehicles Act before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- along with interest from the date of the petition till the date of deposit.
6. The deceased was aged about 41 years as on the date of accident and was Government employee and earning Rs.50,000/- per month and the deceased used to contribute her earnings to the claimants for their maintenance and due to the accident, the lives of claimants became miserable and father LNA,J MACMA No.1242 of 2023 3 of the claimants died long back and the claimants lost their mother at the tender age.
7. The respondent No.3 herein, who is the owner of the offending vehicle, remained ex-parte.
8. The appellant-Insurance Company written statement denying all the allegations in respect of the accident and as to the age of deceased, avocation, earning capacity, health condition and the dependency of the claimants. It is further contended that appellant did not receive any report in form-54 as per Section 158(6) from the concerned Police Station within 30 days from the date of the accident and prayed to dismiss the claim petition.
9. On the basis of the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues:
i) Whether the deceased in this case by name Smt. Ausala Dhanalaxmi died due to injuries sustained in the accident which took place on 06.07.2020 at about 10.30 hours at Court chowrastha, Nizamabad ?
ii) Whether the accident in this case took place due to rash and negligent driving of driver of Ashok Leyland Mini goods vehicle vide TS-16-UB-3527?
LNA,J MACMA No.1242 of 2023 4
iii) Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from which respondents ?
iv) To what relief ?
10. In order to substantiate the case, on behalf of the claimants, PWs.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.A1 to A11 were marked. On behalf of the appellant-insurance company, no oral evidence was adduced, but the copy of the insurance policy was marked as Ex.B1 with consent.
11. The Tribunal, on due consideration of the evidence and material placed on record, came to conclusion that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of Ashok Leyland Mini goods vehicle bearing registration No.TS-16-UB-3527 and awarded compensation of Rs.45,05,472/- along with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. The owner of the crime vehicle i.e., respondent No.3 herein and appellant are jointly and severally liable to pay the same compensation amount.
12. During the course of hearing of the appeal, learned counsel for appellant-insurance company submitted that the LNA,J MACMA No.1242 of 2023 5 Tribunal ought to have seen that even though the age of the deceased, as per the crime documents, was 41 years at the time of accident, as per Ex.A11-service register of the deceased, the date of birth of the deceased was shown as 24.04.1975. As such, as on the date of the accident, the deceased has already crossed 45 years and her age to be treated as 46 years and correct multiplier as per Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another 1 case, is 13. The Tribunal ought to have applied '13' as multiplier instead of '14'. The Tribunal erred in taking the gross salary instead of considering the net salary of the deceased and calculated the loss of dependency on that amount. The Tribunal erred in awarding interest at 8% per annum, which is on very high side. The Tribunal ought not to have awarded interest on future prospects for the reason that the amount towards future prospects have already been awarded to the claimants and finally, prayed to set aside the award passed by the Tribunal.
13. The learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 - claimants submitted that the Tribunal on considering the 1 (2009) 6 SCC 121 LNA,J MACMA No.1242 of 2023 6 evidence and material placed on record, had rightly awarded the compensation and there is no need to interfere with the award passed by the Tribunal.
Consideration:
14. Insofar as the contention of the learned counsel for appellant that Tribunal erred in taking the gross salary of the deceased at Rs.31,324/-, the Tribunal considering the fact that 16 years of service was still left with the deceased as on the date of the accident and that she would have gone upto the rank of Senior Assistant, had taken the income of the deceased at Rs.31,324/- per month as per Ex.A5, as per which, she was working as Junior Assistant in Prohibition and Excise Department, Government of Telangana.
15. Insofar as the other contention of the learned counsel for appellant with regard to date of birth of the deceased is concerned, as per Ex.A11-service register, the date of birth of the deceased was shown as 24.04.1975 and the date of accident was 06.07.2020. Considering the date of birth as per Ex.A11 LNA,J MACMA No.1242 of 2023 7 and date of accident as 06.07.2020, the age of the deceased was 45 years, 2 months, 12 days.
16. Considering the age of the deceased as 46 years, the multiplier, as per Sarla Verma's case, is 13 (for the age groups of 46 to 50 years). The Tribunal erred in adopting the multiplier '14' instead of '13' and the same has to be modified.
17. Insofar as the addition of future prospects is concerned, as per the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and others 2 at paragraph- 59.3, the addition of 30% of the income of the deceased should be made towards future prospects, where the deceased had a permanent job and was between the age of 40 to 50 years. Therefore, the Tribunal erred in adding 25% of the income of the deceased towards future prospects, instead of 30% and the same has to be modified.
18. With regard to the quantum of interest awarded, the Hon'ble Supreme Court very recently in the case of Anjali and 2 (2017) 16 SCC 680 LNA,J MACMA No.1242 of 2023 8 others vs Lokendra Rathod and others 3 decided on 06.12.2022, had granted interest @ 9% per annum. Therefore, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the interest awarded by the Tribunal.
Conclusion:
19. In view of the above discussion, the material and evidence placed on record, the compensation amount is re-calculated as under:
Sl.No. Head Compensation awarded
1 Income Rs.3,75,888/- per annum
(Rs.31,324/- per month)
2 Future prospects Rs.1,12,766/- (i.e., 30% of the
income)
3 Deduction towards personal Rs.1,62,885/- (i.e., 1/3rd of
expenses Rs.3,75,888/- + Rs.1,12,766/-)
4 Total Income Rs.3,25,769/- ( i.e., Rs.3,75,888/- +
Rs.1,12,766/- (-) Rs.1,62,885/-)
5 Multiplier 13
6 Loss of dependency Rs.42,34,997/- (i.e., Rs.3,25,769/- x
13)
7 Transportation charges Rs. 10,000/-
8 Consortium (2 x Rs.40,000/- Rs. 80,000/-
9 Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/-
10 Loss of estate Rs. 15,000/-
Total compensation to be paid: Rs.43,54,997/-
3
2023(1) ALD 107(SC)
LNA,J
MACMA No.1242 of 2023
9
20. In the result, Appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award passed by the Tribunal insofar as compensation amount is concerned, is modified. The above compensation amount shall carry interest @ 8% per annum from the date of the claim petition till the date of realization. The appellant is directed to deposit the above compensation amount within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, duly adjusting the amount already deposited by the appellant. The claimants are entitled to the apportionment of the amount as directed by the Tribunal. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications if any shall stand closed.
__________________________________ LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY,J Date: 27.12.2023 kkm LNA,J MACMA No.1242 of 2023 10 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY M.A.C.M.A.NO.1242 OF 2023 Date: 27.12.2023 kkm