Telangana High Court
S Manjula, Secunderabad And 3 Others vs Ch Anjaiah, Ranga Reddy Dist And 2 Others on 15 April, 2024
Author: N.Tukaramji
Bench: N.Tukaramji
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
AND
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI
M.A.C.M.A.No.1509 OF 2017
AND
M.A.C.M.A. No.1787 OF 2017
COMMON JUDGMENT:
(per Hon'ble Sri Justice N. Tukaramji) These appeals have been preferred by the claim petitioners and the respondent No.3/insurer disputing the quantum of compensation awarded in the decree and order dated 07.10.2016 in M.V.O.P.No.399 of 2015 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-XXVII Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad.
2. We have heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Maddisetty, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.M. Satish Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent No.3/Insurer.
3. For the facility, the appellants are hereinafter referred to as per their rank before the tribunal.
4. The petitioners' case in brief is that on 09.02.2015 while Mr.S.Srisailam @ Srisailam Yadav/deceased was attending gardening work, one maxi cab bearing registration No. AP-28-TA- 9139 (for short, 'the maxi cab') came in rash and negligent manner SPJ&NTRJ 2 Macmas_1509_2017&1787_2017 at high speed and dashed him and caused fatal injuries. Later while undergoing treatment he succumbed.
5. Thereupon the petitioners/wife, son, daughter and mother of the deceased filed claim pleading that the deceased was aged about 35 years and as gardener in HMDA was earning Rs.21,000/- per month and used to contribute all his earnings on them. Thus for loss of dependency claimed compensation of Rs.45 lakhs. The tribunal after inquiry awarded Rs.30,65,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization against the driver, owner and insurer of the maxi cab/respondents 1 to 3.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the tribunal had erroneously ignored future prospects of the deceased and the multiplier employed is improper. Thus prayed for reassessment and to award just compensation.
7. The respondent No.3/insurer, in appeal, contested that the tribunal without there being valid evidence considered the monthly income and assessed compensation on higher side. Further the amounts awarded towards conventional heads are against the SPJ&NTRJ 3 Macmas_1509_2017&1787_2017 settled propositions and the interest rate granted is beyond the settled positions. Hence prayed for interference.
8. We have duly considered the submissions of the learned counsel and perused the materials on record.
9. The factors of the accident, death of the deceased and the liability of the respondents to pay compensation are not in dispute.
10. As per the petitioners the deceased was aged about 35 years and as gardener in HMDA was earning Rs.21,000/- per month. No document has been placed to prove the age of the deceased. Therefore, by considering the entries in inquest and post mortem examination report/Exs:A-4 and A-5, the relevant age of the deceased can safely be taken at 36 years.
11. The Forest Manager in HMDA as PW-3 deposed that the deceased was working as plantation assistant in Urban Forestry Department, HMDA and was earning Rs.21,000/- per month as salary. He has validated the appointment letter/Ex.A-7 and salary certificate/Ex.A-8. Relying on this evidence, the tribunal has rightly believed the occupation and monthly income at Rs.21,000/-. Hence this finding is affirmed.
SPJ&NTRJ 4 Macmas_1509_2017&1787_2017
12. In assessment of compensation, the Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and others1 and Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another2 unequivocally held that the gross income less tax payable shall be taken as actual income. As noted above, the annual gross income of the deceased would be of 2,52,000/- (Rs.21,000/- x 12) and after deducting the professional tax, Rs.2,50,000/- can be taken as annual income which is within taxable limit. For the age and regular employment as per the directives of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the dictum of Pranay Sethi (supra) 50% of the income has to be added towards future prospects. Thus the annual income of the deceased would be of Rs.3,75,000/-. As the dependants are four in number, 1/4th of the income has to be deducted towards personal living expenses. Thus the annual contribution of the deceased to the family would be of Rs.2,81,250/-. This amount if multiplied with the relevant multiplier applicable to the age of the deceased as prescribed in the authority of Sarla Verma (supra) i.e. 15, the sum would come to Rs.42,18,750/-. This amount would be the compensation for loss of dependency.
1 (2017) 16 SCC 860 2 2009 ACJ 1298 SPJ&NTRJ 5 Macmas_1509_2017&1787_2017
13. In addition, as per the judgment in United India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur and others 3 the petitioners are entitled for spousal, parental and filial consortium at Rs.48,400/- each and Rs.36,300/- towards loss of estate and funeral expenses.
14. Correspondingly, the petitioners are entitled for total compensation of Rs.44,48,650/- (Rupees forty four lakhs forty eight thousand six hundred and fifty only). As the rate of interest granted by the tribunal is in conformity with the bank rate and the interest rate granted by the Hon'ble Apex Court in recent judgments of motor accident claim matters, no impropriety is found. As such the interest rate awarded by the tribunal is maintained and the ratio of apportionment among the petitioners shall remain as per the impugned order. The respondent No.3/insurer is directed to deposit the differential compensation amount within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
15. Accordingly the impugned order stands modified.
16. Resultantly, M.A.C.M.A. No.1509 of 2017 filed by the petitioners is partly allowed with proportionate costs and 3 2021(11) SCC 780 SPJ&NTRJ 6 Macmas_1509_2017&1787_2017 M.A.C.M.A.No.1787 of 2017 filed by the respondent No.3/insurer is dismissed without costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions if any, stands closed.
______________ SUJOY PAUL, J _______________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date:15.04.2024 ccm