Bajaj Allianz General Insurance ... vs Smt. D. Laxmi Devi And 4 Others

          HON'BLE SMT. JUTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

                   M.A.C.M.A.No. 2819 of 2009
                              AND
                   M.A.C.M.A.No. 549 of 2010

     COMMON JUDGMENT:

               Aggrieved by the Award dated 04.04.2009 in

O.P.No. 2007 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims

Tribunal-cum-XVI     Additional   Chief   Judge-cum-II   Additional

Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, the Insurance Company

filed M.A.C.M.A.No. 2819 of 2009 and the claimants filed

M.A.C.M.A.No. 549 of 2010.


2.       The claimants filed the above O.P. seeking compensation

of Rs.8,00,000/- for the death of one D. Nagappa (deceased) due to

the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident that

occurred on 10.07.2007. On that day, at about 10.45 a.m., near

Ludheran Church Petrol Bunk, Ravindrabharathi, Hyderabad,

while the deceased was going to DGP Office on foot, he met with

the accident. While undergoing treatment at Somalia General

Hospital, he succumbed to the injuries. According to the

claimants, the deceased was a retired Inspector of Police, drawing

a monthly pension of Rs.9,563/-. First claimant is the wife,

claimants 2 and 3 are daughter and son and the 4th claimant is

the father of the deceased.
                                    2




3.      The owner of the crime vehicle as well as the Insurance

company filed their respective counter-affidavits denying the

averments of the claim petition.


4.      The claimants in support of their case, examined P.Ws.1

and 2 and got marked Exs.A1 to A5. On behalf of the respondents,

R.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.B1 and B2 were marked.


5.      The Tribunal after going through the entire material and

the evidence placed on record, held that the accident occurred due

to the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the

crime auto and allowed the Claim Petition in part. As against the

claim of Rs.8 lacs, Rs.3,38,000/- was awarded with proportionate

costs and interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till

the date of deposit and apportioned the amount among the

claimants.


6.      Learned Standing Counsel for the Insurance Company Sri

A. Ramakrishna Reddy submits that the person driving the vehicle

has no driving licence at the time of accident. As the owner of the

vehicle allowed the person, who does not have the valid licence, to

drive the vehicle, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the

compensation. The said aspect was not dealt with by the Tribunal.

He submits that compensation of Rs.3,38,000/- is excessive

against the claimed compensation of Rs.8 lacs.
                                                 3




7.                     Learned       counsel        for   the   claimant      Sri   M.

Ramalingeswara Reddy submits that the Tribunal has taken the

monthly income of the deceased at Rs.4,500/- by deducting one-

third instead of taking the monthly income at Rs.10,000/- to

Rs.15,000/-. He submits that for his age, multiplier applicable is

'10', but the Tribunal has taken it as '8' and also the Tribunal

instead of granting interest at 9%, granted 7.5% only.


8.                     The deceased was a retired employee. He worked as

the Inspector of Police and was drawing monthly pension of

Rs.9,563/-. Even after the death of the husband, the 1st claimant

is receiving half of the pension. Hence, the income of the deceased

can be taken as Rs.4,782/-. As he was aged about 58 years, 15%

future prospects would come to Rs.717/- i.e. Rs.5,499 rounded off

to Rs.5,500/-. For twelve months it would be Rs.5,500 /- x 12 =

Rs.66,000/-.                 As   there   are   four      claimants,   if   one-fourth

(Rs.6,500/-) is deducted it would come to Rs. 49,500/-. As per the

judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance

Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi1, the multiplier is taken as

'9'. Then it would come to Rs.4,45,000/-. For four claimants i.e.

wife, daughter, son and father, consortium is Rs.1,76,000/-,

funeral expenses are Rs.33,000/-. The total compensation would

come to Rs.6,54,500/-.




     1
         (2017) 16 SCC 680
                                          4




9.                In that view of the matter, the Appeal of the

Insurance Company i.e. M.A.C.M.A.No. 2819 of 2009 is dismissed.

No order as to costs.


10.               The appellants in M.A.C.M.A.No.549 of 2010 are

entitled to the amount under the following heads:


       Head                                     Compensation awarded

     (1) Loss of income                          Rs.4,45,500/-
     (2) Consortium                              Rs.1,76,000/-
     (3) Funeral expenses                        Rs.33,000/-
     (4) Legal expenses                          Rs.10,000/-
     (5) Total compensation                      Rs.6,64,500/-


     11.          In the result, M.A.C.M.A. No. 549 of 2010 is allowed

     enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal

     from Rs.3,38,000/- to Rs.6,64,500/- as under:

           (a) The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 7.5% p.a.

           from the date of petition till the date of realization.

           (b)   The   claimants   are       entitled   to   the   amount   as

           apportioned by the Tribunal.

           (c) The Insurance company shall deposit the amount

           within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of

           copy of judgment.        On such deposit, claimants are

           entitled to withdraw their proportionate share without

           furnishing any security.
                                         5




12.                  Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand

closed.


                                              ------------------------------------

LALITHA KANNEGANTI,J 27th February 2023 ksld 6