HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
AND
HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA
M.A.C.M.A No.1315 OF 2010
JUDGMENT: (as per Hon'ble Smt. Justice K. Sujana)
This appeal is filed by the appellants/claimants for
enhancement of amount against the award passed by the
learned XV Additional Chief Judge-cum-I Additional
Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad in O.P.No.2431 of
2004, dated 02.08.2008.
2. Heard Sri Kakara Venkata Rao, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the appellants and Sri A. Rama
Krishna Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in holding that the driver of the Lorry was not having valid driving license, despite the fact that the Insurance Company did not adduce any evidence to prove the said allegation and they did not even examine any person connected with the document i.e., Ex.A9 - Attested copy of KL,J & SKS,J MACMA.No.1315 of 2010 2 Driving Licence of Lorry Driver. Learned counsel further contended that the Tribunal ought to have taken into consideration, the income declared under Ex.A.27 - Attested copy of Saral Form for the assessment year 2004-2005 and the income received under Ex.A.29 - Attested Xerox copy of Form No.16 and also the income received from the Cinema Theaters for calculating the loss of dependency. The Tribunal also not applied proper multiplier and the reasons assigned by the Tribunal are erroneous and unsustainable. Therefore, he prayed this Court to enhance the compensation amount, as prayed for.
4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2/Insurance Company supported the award of the Tribunal and requested this Court not to interfere with the same.
5. In the Tribunal, appellants filed petition claiming compensation of Rs.68,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty Eight Lakhs) for the death of Sri N. Madava Rao (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') in the motor accident dated 10.03.2004, which happened due to rash and negligent driving of the Lorry KL,J & SKS,J MACMA.No.1315 of 2010 3 bearing No.HR 38G 0992 by its driver. On 10.03.2004, at about 11:30 AM the deceased N. Madhava Rao and his employee M. Raju were going in a Maruthi Car bearing No. AP 0 AG 8979 towards Karimnagar from Hyderabad on left side of the road and on reaching Alugunuru cross roads, one Lorry bearing No. HR 38G 0992 with a load of cotton seeds coming from Warangal side and going towards Karimnagar side in a rash and negligent manner with high speed driven by its driver, hit a road divider and climbed on it and in turn fell on the Zen Car, in which the deceased and M. Raju were travelling. Due to the said impact, the deceased and M. Raju died on the spot. On receipt of complaint, the concerned police took the investigation and filed Exs.A1 to A4
- Certified Copy of First Information, Certified Copy of Inquest Panchanama, Certified Copy of Charge Sheet and Certified Copy of F.M.E report and A7-scene of offence Panchnama. The Tribunal decided that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the Lorry driver.
6. Now, the Insurance Company is also not disputed the negligence of the lorry driver in this appeal. Therefore, there KL,J & SKS,J MACMA.No.1315 of 2010 4 is no issue with regard to negligence on the part of the lorry driver. The Tribunal assessed that income of the deceased was basing on Ex.A24 and A25 which were filed by the wife of the deceased. Basing on Ex.A24 and A25, which are income tax returns, the income of the deceased is Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand only) in an average, wherein the contention of the claimants is that they submitted all the documents to consider the income of the deceased. The appellants filed income tax returns and also income and balance sheets on various accounts and the income was calculated basing on the income tax returns in Ex.A24 and A25, in an average, income is taken as Rs.1,50,000/- per annum. Therefore, there is no irregularity in calculating the income as Rs.1,50,000/- per annum.
7. This Court is of the view that as there was no evidence, the Tribunal has rightly taken Rs.1,50,000/- as the annual income of the deceased. Hence, this Court is inclined to consider the annual income of the deceased at Rs.1,50,000/-.
KL,J & SKS,J MACMA.No.1315 of 2010 5
8. The Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi 1 held that while considering the compensation in cases of death, the future prospects of the self employed shall also be considered. Having regard to the age and occupation as self-employed, if 25 percent of the income is included as future prospects, the annual income would come to Rs.1,87,500/- (Rupees One Lakh Eighty Seven Thousand Five Hundred only). As the dependants are four members, 1/4th of the income has to be deducted towards personal expenditure, as per law laid down in Smt. Sarla Varma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation 2. Thus, the annual contribution of the deceased to the claimants would be of Rs.1,40,625/- (1,87,500-46,875). The appropriate multiplier to be applied as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sarla Verma's case is '13'. Thus, the annual loss of dependency comes to Rs.18,28,125/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Twenty Eight Thousand One Hundred and Twenty Five only). The claimants are entitled for the said amount under the head of loss of dependency. 1 2017 (6) 170 (SC) 2 (2009) 6 S.C.C. 121 KL,J & SKS,J MACMA.No.1315 of 2010 6
9. As regards the consortium to be paid to the dependants of the deceased is concerned, each one is entitled to Rs.40,000/- towards consortium as decided by the Hon'ble Apex court in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others 3. With regard to the funeral expenses and loss of estate, the claimants are entitled to Rs.30,000/-.
10. In the light of the above mentioned discussion, the claimants are entitled to the following amounts:
Head Compensation awarded
(1) Loss of dependency Rs.18,28,125 /-
(2) Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/-
(3) Loss of Estate Rs.15,000/-
(4) Loss of consortium Rs. 1,60,000/-
(40,000 x 4)
(5) Transportation Rs. 5,000/-
(6) Damage to clothing Rs. 1,000/-
Total compensation awarded Rs. 20,24,125 /-
3
2017 ACJ 2700
KL,J & SKS,J
MACMA.No.1315 of 2010
7
(Rupees Twenty Lakhs Twenty Four thousand one hundred and twenty five only)
11. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed, enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.9,30,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs Thirty Thousand only) to Rs.20,24,125/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Twenty Four thousand one hundred and twenty five only). The enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till realization.
12. The respondents in MVOP.No.2431 of 2004 owner and insurance company of the lorry are jointly liable to pay the compensation and respondent No.2/insurance company shall pay the amount and recover from the owner of the vehicle by initiating proceedings in execution and the compensation amount shall be apportioned among the claimants in the same proportionate in which original compensation amounts were directed to be apportioned by the Tribunal. As far as loss of consortium amounts are concerned, the respective claimants alone are entitled to receive the amount out of the above said total compensation and the insurance company is KL,J & SKS,J MACMA.No.1315 of 2010 8 directed to deposit the amount after deducting the amount already paid within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
13. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in these appeals shall stand closed.
____________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J ___________________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 08.09.2023 sai KL,J & SKS,J MACMA.No.1315 of 2010 9 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN AND HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA M.A.C.M.A.No.1315 OF 2010 (pre-delivery order of the Division Bench prepared by the Hon'ble Smt Justice K. Sujana) Date: 08.09.2023 SAI