Telangana High Court
Smt.Kunchakuri Rama Devi, ... vs A.P.S.R.T.C. Rep By M.D., ... on 5 December, 2022
Bench: G.Anupama Chakravarthy
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
M.A.C.M.A.No.4638 of 2008
JUDGMENT :
This appeal is filed by the claimants being aggrieved by the
order and decree dated 30.06.2008 in O.P.No.278 of 2007 on the
file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District
Judge, Nalgonda, for the death of the deceased, namely, Srinivas @
Seenaiah, who died in the accident which occurred on 06.01.2007
at 5.30 p.m.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as
arrayed in the O.P.
3. Initially, the claim was made for Rs.5,00,000/- and the
Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.2,49,000/-. Since the appeal is
filed only for enhancement of compensation, the appreciation in
this appeal would be only with respect to that aspect.
4. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the
record.
GAC, J
MACMA.No.4638 of 2008
5. It is contended by the learned counsel for the claimants that
the deceased was aged about 30 years at the time of the accident
and he was working as a Clerk in Rice Mill and used to earn
Rs.4,000/- per month. The claimants are the wife and parents of
the deceased and due to the untimely death of deceased, the family
lost love and affection as well as the financial income.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents
contended that the Tribunal has granted adequate compensation to
the claimants, and therefore, there is no necessity to interfere with
the orders of the Tribunal and prayed to dismiss the O.P.
7. PW-1 is the wife of the deceased, PW-2 is the eye witness to
the accident and PW-3 is the Managing Partner of the Rice Mill,
where the deceased was alleged to have worked as a Clerk. Ex.A-7
is the salary certificate issued by PW-3, which was disbelieved by
the Tribunal and the income of the deceased was fixed by the
Tribunal as Rs.1,500/- per month.
8. It is specifically contended by the learned counsel for the
appellants that the Tribunal has erred in not taking into
GAC, J
MACMA.No.4638 of 2008
consideration Ex.A-7/salary certificate, though PW-3's oral
evidence corroborates the documentary evidence and prayed to
consider the said document.
9. The Tribunal has granted compensation to the claimants
under the following heads:
1. Loss of dependency - Rs.2,16,000/-
2. Loss of consortium -Rs.15,000/-
3. Loss of Estate -Rs.15,000/-
4. Funeral expenses -Rs.3,000/-
TOTAL -Rs.2,49,000/-
10. Admittedly, Ex.A-7/salary certificate discloses that the
deceased used to earn Rs.4,000/- per month, which is corroborated
with the oral evidence of PW-3, but the Tribunal has erred in not
considering the said document and discarded it without assigning
proper reasons. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that
the income of the deceased can be fixed as per Ex.A-7. The
Tribunal has also erred in applying the multiplier '18' instead of
'17'.
11. As stated supra, the deceased was aged 30 years as on the
date of the accident and the income of the deceased is fixed as
GAC, J
MACMA.No.4638 of 2008
Rs.4,000/- per month as a labour. As per the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Smt.Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport
Corporation & another1, the multiplier applicable is '17' for the
age group of 26 to 30 years. If 40% is added towards future
prospects, it would come to Rs.5,600/- (Rs.4,000 X
40/100+Rs.4,000). The claimants in this case are three in number,
who are the wife and parents of the deceased. As per the judgment
in Sarla Verma's case (1 supra), 1/3rd is to be deducted towards
personal expenses of deceased and the appropriate multiplier
would be '17'. Thus, the loss of dependency would come to
Rs.7,61,600/- (Rs.5,600 X 12 X 17 X 2/3). As per the proposition
laid down by the Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v.
Pranay Sethi & others2, consortium @ Rs.40,000/- is to be
granted to the wife and parents of the deceased and the claimants
are also entitled for compensation towards funeral expenses and
loss of estate to a tune of Rs.15,000/- each.
12. Thus, the claimants are entitled to compensation under the
following heads;
(2009) 6 SCC 121
2017 ACJ 2700
GAC, J
MACMA.No.4638 of 2008
1. Loss of dependency - Rs.7,61,600/-
2. Funeral expenses - Rs.15,000/-
3. Consortium @Rs.40,000 - Rs.1,20,000/-
Each for the wife and parents
of the deceased)
4. Loss of Estate - Rs.15,000/-
TOTAL - Rs.9,11,600/-
13. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, granting a total
compensation of Rs.9,11,600/- with costs and interest at the rate of
7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of
realization, payable by the respondent, within one month from the
date of receipt of this order. The appellants/claimants are entitled
to withdraw their respective shares of compensation along with
costs and interest, as the accident occurred in the year 2007, on
payment of deficit Court fee.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed.
________________________________
G.ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY, J
Date: 05.12.2022
ajr
