Telangana High Court
M/S United India Insurance Company ... vs D.Radhika , Lavanya And 5 Others on 18 July, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
M.A.C.M.A Nos.2831 of 2013 and 1692 of 2014 COMMON JUDMENT:
Two separate appeals have been filed by the claimant and the Insurance Company against the Judgment and Decree dated 22.04.2013 passed by the learned I Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar (for short 'the trial Court') in O.P.No.747 of 2010, whereunder the trial Court granted an amount of Rs.7,60,000/- towards compensation. The Insurance Company has filed M.A.C.M.A.No.2831 of 2013 seeking to set aside the impugned Order while M.A.C.M.A. No.1692 of 2014 was filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of the compensation granted by the trial Court.
2. Heard Sri V. V. Satish, learned counsel appearing for the claimants and Sri R. Sheetal Kumar, learned counsel appearing in place of Sri Ravi Shankar Jandhyala, learned counsel for the Insurance Company and perused the record.
3. The case of the claimants is that the deceased, who is the husband of claimant No.1, while going on his Hero Honda 2 Passion, the offending vehicle, which is a lorry, came in a high speed and driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the vehicle of the deceased. Resulting which, the deceased received severe injuries and died on the spot.
4. The manner in which the accident had taken place, death of the deceased and the liability, are not disputed by the Insurance Company.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company would submit that it was not proved in the trial Court that the claimants are the legal heirs of the deceased. The name of the wife of the deceased in the pan card is shown as Radhika (Lavanya) w/o Yadagiri. However, the Court below placed reliance on the birth certificate of the child issued by the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad in the year 2005, which reflects that the child was born on 08.09.2005 and the name of the father reflects as D.Rajesh and mother name as D.Radhika (Lavanya). In the said circumstances it cannot be said that the claimants are the legal heirs of the deceased D. Rajesh.
3
6. Perusal of the record, the claim is that as per Ex.A8/salary certificate, the deceased was earning Rs.15,000/- per month, however the employee was not examined before the trial Court. The claimants were leading reasonable life and claimant No.2 was a student. In the said circumstances, it can be reasonably inferred that the income would not be less than Rs.7,000/- per month. Therefore, income of the deceased is fixed at Rs.7,000/- per month. Then annual income of the deceased comes to Rs.84,000/-.
7. The grounds raised by the learned counsel appearing for the claimants is that the trial Court has not considering granting of 40% future prospects, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi 1, the consortium can also be awarded and further the multiplier applied by the trial Court is not appropriate.
8. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Varma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation 2, 1 2017(6) ALD 170 (SC) 2 2009(6) SCC 121 4 the appropriate multiplier would be '17'. Therefore, the claimants are entitled for the compensation as follows:
Sl. Head Amount
No.
01 Annual income of the deceased per Rs. 84,000/-
annum Rs.7,000/- x 12
02 Since the deceased has three Rs. 56,000/-
dependents, the income can be
deducted towards personal
expenditure 84,000/- x 1/3 =
Rs.28,000/- ; Rs.84,000 - 28,000
03 40% of actual income added as Rs. 33,600/-
future prospects
84,000 x 40/100
04 As per the age of the deceased, the Rs.15,23,200/-
multiplier is '17' and the loss of
dependency is
56,000/- + 33,600/- x 17
05 Consortium to claimants Rs. 1,20,000/-
3 x 40,000/-
06 Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/-
07 Loss of estate Rs. 15,000/-
Total Rs. 16,73,200/-
9. In the result, M.A.C.M.A.No.2831 of 2013 filed by the Insurance Company is dismissed and M.A.C.M.A.No.1692 of 2014 filed by the claimants is allowed in-part enhancing the 5 compensation awarded by the trial Court from Rs.7,60,000/- to Rs. 16,73,200/- as hereunder:
(a) The enhanced amount shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.
(b) The insurance company shall deposit the compensation amount within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of judgment. On such deposit, the claimants are permitted to withdraw their proportionate shares without furnishing any security, after depositing the deficit Court-fee. The rest of the impugned Order holds good. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________ K.SURENDER, J Date : 18.07.2024 vsu