Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Eerla Ramadevi, Prakasam Dist And Two ... vs V.V.Ravi Kumar, Prakasam Dist Another on 9 August, 2024

APHC010601872017

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                 AT AMARAVATI             [3470]
                          (Special Original Jurisdiction)

                   FRIDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF AUGUST
                   TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
                               PRESENT

       THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

        THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

     MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO:
                        2121/2017

Between:
                                                 ...APPELLANT(S)
Eerla Ramadevi, Prakasam Dist And Two Others
and Others
                              AND
                                               ...RESPONDENT(S)
V V Ravi Kumar Prakasam Dist Another and
Others

Counsel for the Appellant(S):
  1. SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI

Counsel for the Respondent(S):
  1. P BHASKAR
  2. GUDI SRINIVASU
  3. .
The Court made the following:
                             2


       HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
                               AND
        HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY


                M.A.C.M.A.No.2121 of 2017

JUDGMENT:

(Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Nyapathy Vijay)

This Appeal is filed under section 173 of the Motor

Vehicles Act,1988 by the claimants seeking enhancement of

the compensation awarded in the Order and Decree dated

15.09.2016 passed in M.V.O.P.No.765 of 2008 by the

Principal, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nellore.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter

referred to as they were arrayed before the Tribunal.

3. The brief facts of the case are as under:

The claimants are the wife and children of

one Eerla Hari Babu (hereinafter called as 'deceased'). They

had filed MVOP claiming compensation on account of the

death of the deceased for a sum of Rs.1,00,00,000/-. It is

their case that on 14.09.2007, while the deceased was

proceeding in a car bearing No.AP-10AV-T/R-2223 along with

his friend V.V.Ravi Kumar from Cheemakurthi to Chennai.

When they reached near Swarna Toll Plaza near Sullurupet,

the driver of the car in a rash and negligent manner dashed

the toll way stop rod and dashed an ongoing lorry from its

behind. As a result, the car turned turtle and both the

deceased as well as his friend died on the spot. The dead

bodies were shifted to Government Hospital, Sullurpet. A

case in Crime No.64 of 2007 was registered by the

D.V.Satram Police Station. The deceased was aged 42 years

at the time of accident and was earning Rs.86,000/- per

month by transporting granite in his lorries.

4. The Respondent No.1 owner of the offending vehicle

remained ex parte. The Respondent No.2-insurance

company filed their formatted counter denying every aspect of

the claim.

5. In the course of trial, on behalf of claimants,

P.Ws.1 to 5 were examined on behalf of claimants and

Exs.A.1 to A.15 were marked. The Exs.X.1 to X.3 were

marked through PW.3. On behalf of respondents, Ex.B.1

insurance policy was marked.

6. The Tribunal framed the following issues:

1. Whether the accident, resulting in death of the deceased, had occurred due to negligent driving of car bearing No.AP-10- AV-T/R-2223, by its driver?

2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for any compensation? If so, how much amount and from which of the respondents?

3. To what relief?

7. After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the

Tribunal had adopted a multiplier of 14 and assessed Rs.40,000/- as

the income of the deceased and granted compensation of

Rs.43,51,800/- with interest @ 9 % per annum. Hence, the present

Appeal is filed seeking enhancement.

8. Heard Sri V.Siva Prasad Reddy, learned counsel for the

appellant and Sri Gudi Srinivasu, learned counsel for respondent

No.2-Insurance company.

9. As the scope of the appeal is only vis-a-vis correctness of

compensation, the evidence on record are the Income tax returns

for the Financial Years 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07 which are

marked as Ex. A.5, A.6 ,A.7, A.14 and A.15 on behalf of the

claimants and as Ex.X1, X2 and X.3 through PW.3 for very same

financial years.

10. (A). As per Ex.A.7 and Ex.X.1, the income of the deceased as

per for Financial Year 2004-05 after deduction of tax is as under;

      Total Income                        Rs.133631/-

      Income Tax                          Rs.15,726/-

      Income after deduction of Tax       Rs. 1,17,905/-.

(B). As per Ex.A.6,A.14 and Ex.X.2, the income of the

deceased as per for Financial Year 2005-06 after deduction of tax

is as under;

      Total Income                        Rs.6,45,656/-

      Income Tax                          Rs.1,43,698/-

      Income after deduction of Tax       Rs. 5,01,958/-.

(C). As per Ex.A.5, A.15 and Ex.X.3, the income of the

deceased as per for Financial Year 2006-07 after deduction of tax

is as under;

      Total Income                        Rs.9,00,000/-

      Income Tax                          Rs.2,24,400/-

      Income after deduction of Tax       Rs.6,75,600/-

11. The Tribunal did not take into consideration the Income Tax

returns for the financial year 2007-2008 as they were filed on

22.01.2008 i.e after the accident and was not supported by any

books of account. The PW.3 is the chartered accountant in his

deposition though had stated that the deceased owned three lorries,

but admitted that Income Tax returns for the financial year 2007-08

are not supported by books of accounts. PW.4 was the Inspector

from the Income Tax department, had deposed that Income Tax

returns for the financial year 2007-08 were based on estimation

under Section 44 AE of the Act.

12. An examination of Ex.A.15 i.e certified copy of the detailed

Income Tax return for the Financial Year 2006-2007 would indicate

that TDS collected from the deceased was Rs.2,81,992/-. This

deduction of TDS is supported by statutory Form 16A and related

documents issued in the name of the deceased were enclosed

under Ex.A.15. The reasoning of the Tribunal in ignoring Ex.A.5,

A.15 and Ex.X.3 merely because the Income Tax returns were filed

on 22.1.2008 and not supported by books of accounts cannot be

sustained as the deceased did business and had earned income in

that year as apparent from the TDS deducted. Further, the Income

tax return for Financial Year 2006-07 even though it was based on

estimated income, was supported by TDS amounts deducted and

the Income Tax department had accepted the Income Tax return.

Therefore, it would not be open to the Insurance company to object

to the Income under Ex.A.15 from being taken into consideration.

13. Hence, considering Ex.A.5, A.6, A.7, A.14 and A.15, the

average income for the financial years 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-

07 after deduction of tax is taken into consideration for the purpose

of computation of compensation. The average income is calculated

as under;

Rs. 1,17,905/-.+Rs. 5,01,958/-+Rs.6,75,600/- = Rs 12,95,463/-

The average income for 3 years is Rs.35,985/-. For the

purpose of computation, Rs.36,000/- is adopted.

14. The revised compensation payable to the claimants, taking

into consideration, the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in

National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and others 1

as well as individual consortium awarded by Hon'ble Supreme Court

2017 SCC OnLine 1270

in Magma General Insurance Company Limited v. Nanu Ram2 is

as under;

S.No                        Head                     Amount


01                  Monthly Income                 Rs.36,000/-

Addition to income to future prospect Rs.45,000/-

02 (@25% deceased being great than than (36000+9000) 40 years and less than 50 years) 03 Annual income(Rs.45000x12) Rs.5,40,000/-

Deduction towards personal & Living Rs.3,60,000/-

                    Expenses(1/3)                (540000-180000)
05         Multiplier based on age of 41 years         14
                                                  Rs.50,40,000/-
06              Amount of compensation
                                                  (3,60,000x14)
07                      Loss of Estate             Rs.1,5000/-

08                 Loss of consortium              Rs.40,000x3

09                 Funeral Expenses                Rs.1,5000/-

             Total amount of compensation        Rs. 51,90,000/-

15. The interest @ 9% awarded by the Tribunal is fair and is

supported by the Judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rahul

Sharma & Another v. National Insurance Company Limited and

(2018) 18 SCC 130

others3 and Kirthi and another v. Oriental Insurance Company

Limited4 on this aspect.

16. The appeal is partly allowed to the extent indicated above.

The Insurance company shall deposit the balance amount within a

period of one month from today before the Tribunal and the

claimants are entitled to withdraw the amounts in proportionate

ratios. No order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous

petitions if any shall stand closed.