1 RRN,J
MACMA No.2275 of 2015
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
M.A.C.M.A. No. 2275 OF 2015
JUDGMENT:
This M.A.C.M.A is filed by the appellants/petitioners under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 aggrieved by the Order and Decree dt.15.05.2012 in O.P NO.213 of 2007 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Nizamabad (for short, 'the Tribunal').
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be hereinafter referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the Tribunal.
3. Vide the aforesaid order, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.1,63,500/- to the petitioners against their claim of Rs.10,00,000/- on account of the death of their father, Madanam Rama Swamy (hereinafter referred to as 'deceased') due to the accident which involved the Scooter he was riding bearing No.AP-1/1585 and the bus of the respondents bearing No.AP-11- X-1632. The appeal is filed questioning the negligence attributed to the deceased, which led the Tribunal in awarding only 50% of the 2 RRN,J MACMA No.2275 of 2015 entitled amount of compensation and also the quantum of compensation under various heads.
4. Heard Sri. Amrutha Sanjeeva, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri. Thoom Srinivas, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents/RTC. Perused the record.
5. It is contended by the petitioners that the Tribunal erred in taking only Rs.3,000/- as the monthly income of the deceased and sought to increase the same. It is further contended that the Tribunal ought not to have deducted 50% of the entitled compensation amount due to alleged contributory negligence of the deceased as PW-4 who is the eye witness had categorically deposed that the accident was due to the sole negligence of the driver of the Bus. It is also contended that the petitioners are entitled to just compensation under various heads as per the settled law and the multiplier to be taken for the calculation of loss of dependency is '14' instead of '13'. Accordingly, prayed to allow the appeal.
6. Opposing the same, the respondents had contended that the Tribunal was justified in passing the impugned order as 3 RRN,J MACMA No.2275 of 2015 there indeed was contributory negligence on the part of the deceased as rightly observed by the Tribunal. Hence, prayed to dismiss the appeal.
7. This Court having considered the submissions of both parties is of the view that the income of the deceased can be taken on the higher side at Rs.4,500/- p.m in the absence of income proof as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ramchandrappa Vs. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd.1 Thus, the annual income of the petitioner would come to Rs.54,000/-. On this income, 25% is to be added towards future prospects as the deceased was aged 45 years, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Vs. Pranay Sethi2, and the same would total to Rs.67,500/- (54,000/- + 13,500/-). Out of the income, 1/4th is to be deducted towards personal expenses and the appropriate multiplier is '14' as per Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Road Transport Corporation3. Thus, the total loss of dependency would come to Rs.67,500/- x ¾ x 14 = Rs. 7,08,750/-. 1 (2011 ) 13 SCC 236 2 (2017) 16 SCC 680.
3(2009) 6 SCC 121.
4 RRN,J
MACMA No.2275 of 2015
8. The petitioners were awarded Rs.10,000/-, Rs.2,500/- and Rs.2,500/- towards loss of estate, funeral expenses and transportation charges respectively and the same are very meagre, as such, they are enhanced to Rs.16,500/- (15,000 + 10%) towards loss of estate, Rs.16,500/- (15,000 + 10%) towards funeral expenses as per Pranay Sethi (supra), and Rs.3,000/- towards transportation charges respectively. As petitioners No.3 to 6 were minors at the time of the death of the deceased, they are entitled to compensation of Rs.40,000/- each under the head 'loss of parental consortium' as per the ratio laid in Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram4 which totals to Rs.1,60,000/-.
9. In all, the petitioners are entitled to Rs.9,04,750/- (Rs.7,08,750/- + 16,500/- + 16,500/- + 3,000/- + 1,60,000/-) towards compensation. The Tribunal awarded only 50% compensation to the petitioners owing to the contributory negligence of the deceased. This Court is inclined to alter such finding by attributing 80% negligence on the part of the driver of the Bus and 20% negligence on the part of the deceased in view of the evidence of PW.4 who is the eyewitness despite there being no 4 2018 Law Suit (SC) 904 5 RRN,J MACMA No.2275 of 2015 material on record to prove as to who caused the accident. Hence, the petitioners are awarded only Rs.7,23,800/- (Rupees Seven lakh, twenty three thousand and eight hundred only) after deducting 20% contributory negligence on the part of the deceased.
10. This Court vide order dt.14.10.2015 in MACMAMP No.4062 of 2015 had condoned the delay of 835 days in filing the present appeal, subject to the condition that the petitioners shall forego the interest for the delay period of 835 days, in the event the appeal is being allowed. As such, the petitioners are not entitled to interest for 835 days on the compensation amount.
11. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A is allowed in part, enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.1,63,500/- to Rs.7,23,800/- (Rupees Seven lakh, twenty three thousand and eight hundred only) with interest at 7.5% from the date of petition till the date of realization, excluding interest for a period of 835 days. The respondents are directed to deposit the said amount with interest and costs within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioners are each entitled to 1/6th share of compensation with proportionate costs 6 RRN,J MACMA No.2275 of 2015 and interest and they are permitted to withdraw their entire share of the amount upon the deposit made by the respondents. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________________ NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, J 16th day of March, 2023 BDR