Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Andhra Pradesh State Road ... vs Manikonda Lakshmi Prasanna, on 5 October, 2023
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO
M.A.C.M.A.No.620 of 2023
JUDGMENT:
Aggrieved by the impugned Award, dated 30.09.2014,
passed in M.V.O.P.No.739 of 2012 on the file of the
Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal -cum- IV
Additional District Judge, Guntur, whereby the Tribunal
awarded an amount of Rs.12,00,000/- to the claimants
and respondent Nos.3 and 4 towards compensation, this
instant appeal is preferred by the Andhra Pradesh State
Road Transport Corporation questioning the legal validity
of the Award passed by the Tribunal.
2. For the sake of convenience, both the parties in the
appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed in claim
application.
3. This aforesaid M.V.O.P.No.739 of 2012 was filed by
the claimants under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act,
1988 (for short "the Act"), claiming compensation of
Rs.8,00,000/- with subsequent interest @ 12% per annum
2 VGKR, J
M.A.C.M.A.No.620 of 2023
from the date of petition till the date of realization and for
costs of the petition for the death caused to the deceased
"Manikonda Sivanjaneyulu" in a Motor Vehicle Accident
that occurred on 30.11.2011.
4. Facts germane to dispose of the appeal may be briefly
stated as follows:-
On 30.11.2011, at about 1.30 p.m., the husband of
the 1st claimant Sivanajaneyulu and his two friends
decided to go to Madanapalli on their motorcycles, enroute
when the husband of the 1st claimant and two others who
are going on their motorcycles reached near Vittalam
Village bus stop turning of Vayalapadu Mandal, at about
5.30 p.m., the 1st respondent who is the driver of the
A.P.S.R.T.C. bus No.AP 28 Z 5545 of Madanapalli II Depot
drove the same in a rash and negligent manner without
taking proper care and dashed the opposite motorcycle
bearing No.AP 03 AR 5080 being driven by the deceased.
As a result of which, the husband of the 1st petitioner i.e.,
deceased fell down on the road along with motorcycle and
sustained grievous injuries and later he was shifted to
3 VGKR, J
M.A.C.M.A.No.620 of 2023
Community Health Centre, Vayalapadu, where he
succumbed with injuries. A case in crime No.124 of 2011
was registered against the driver of the offending
vehicle/A.P.S.R.T.C bus under Ex.A.1. After completion of
investigation, the Sub Inspector of Police laid charge sheet
against the driver of the offending vehicle/A.P.S.R.T.C bus
under Ex.A.5.
5. Based on the above pleadings of both the parties, the
Tribunal framed the following issues for trial:-
1. Whether the accident occurred due to the rash
and negligent driving of the driver of
A.P.S.R.T.C Bus No.AP 28 Z 5545?
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to
compensation, if so, to what amount and
against whom?
3. To what relief?
6. During the course of enquiry, on behalf of the
claimants P.Ws.1 and 2 are examined and marked Exs.A.1
to A.5. On behalf of the Sole respondent, R.W.1 is
examined and marked as Exs.B.1 and B.2.
4 VGKR, J
M.A.C.M.A.No.620 of 2023
7. At the culmination of the enquiry on appreciation of
the entire evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded an
amount of Rs.12,00,000/- towards total compensation to
the claimants and respondent Nos.3 and 4 i.e., dependents
on the deceased.
8. Now the point for determination is:
1. Whether the order of the Tribunal needs any
interference? If so, to what extent?
POINT:
9. Admittedly, P.W.1 is not an eye witness to the
accident, who is none other than the wife of the deceased.
P.W.2 is an eye witness to the accident. As per his
evidence, the accident in question occurred due to rash
and negligent driving of the driver of the offending
vehicle/A.P.S.R.T.C bus driven by its driver and dashed the
two wheeler of the deceased due to that the deceased, fell
down on the road along with two wheeler and later he was
succumbed with injuries in the hospital. On appreciation
of the entire evidence on record, taking into consideration
5 VGKR, J
M.A.C.M.A.No.620 of 2023
of Ex.A.1 certified copy of F.I.R., and Ex.A.5 certified copy
of charge sheet, the Tribunal, rightly held that the accident
in question occurred due to rash and negligent driving of
the driver of the offending vehicle/A.P.S.R.T.C. bus bearing
No. AP 28 Z 5545 in which, the deceased sustained severe
injuries and later succumbed with injuries. I do not find
any illegality in the above finding given by the Tribunal.
10. Coming to the compensation, the claim of the
claimants is that the deceased used to attend electrical
work and used to earn an amount of Rs.10,000/- per
month. By assailing reasons, the accident in question
occurred in the year 2011. The Tribunal rightly arrived the
monthly income of the deceased was an amount of
Rs.6,000/- per month i.e., Rs.200/- per day i.e., his
annual income was Rs.72,000/- per annum. The fact
remains is that the deceased got four dependents. As per
the decision of Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi
6 VGKR, J
M.A.C.M.A.No.620 of 2023
Transport Corporation and another1, 1/4th amount has
to be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased.
If 1/4th amount is deducted from out of Rs.72,000/-, an
amount of Rs.54,000/- is available towards the dependents
of the deceased and the deceased was aged about 25 years
by the date of accident. As per the decision of Sarla
Verma, the appropriate multiplier applicable to the age
group of the deceased is „18‟. Therefore, an amount of
Rs.9,72,000/- (Rs.54,000/- x 18 = Rs.9,72,000/- ) was
awarded towards loss of dependency. As per the decision
of Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited
Vs. Pranay Sethi and others,2 the maximum amount to
be awarded under the conventional heads is Rs.70,000/-
only. Therefore, an amount of Rs.40,000/- was awarded to
the 1st claimant towards loss of consortium, an amount of
Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate, an amount of
Rs.15,000/- towards personal expenses. In total, the
claimants are entitled total compensation of
Rs.10,42,000/-.
2009 ACJ 1298
2017 ACJ 2700
7 VGKR, J
M.A.C.M.A.No.620 of 2023
11. In the result, the appeal filed by the claimants is
partly allowed. Consequently, the claim amount of
Rs.12,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is reduced to
Rs.10,42,000/-. The respondent/A.P.S.R.T.C. is directed
to deposit the remaining balance compensation amount
within two (02) months from the date of this judgment. On
such deposit, the claimants and respondent Nos.3 and 4
are entitled to withdraw the same along with interest
thereon.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending,
shall stand closed.
____________________________________
JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO
05.10.2023
CVD
