Telangana State Road Transport ... vs C. Satyanarayana
2022 Latest Caselaw 3315 Tel

    HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVA RAO NAIDU

                  M.A.C.M.A.NO.382 of 2018

JUDGMENT:

This appeal has been preferred by the State Road Transport

Corporation of Telangana, against the award passed by the Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal, Hyderabad, in M.V.O.P.No.287 of 2014

by which the trial Court awarded a sum of Rs.7,73,000/- against

the claim of Rs.9,00,000/-. The respondents No.1 and 2 are the

parents and respondent No.3 is the younger brother of one

C.Vishnu Kumar, who herein after will be referred a deceased and

who died in a road accident.

2. They have filed a petition under Section 166 of Motor

Vehicles Act, which was registered as M.V.O.P.No.287 of 2014

before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hyderabad and sought

for an amount of Rs.9,00,000/- towards compensation for the

death of deceased in a road accident. According to the material

averments in the said petition, it was their case that on

28.11.2013, while the deceased was proceeding towards

Secunderabad, on a Honda motorcycle and when he reached

Basheerbagh flyover, the driver of AP 29 Z 3550 drove the bus in

high speed, in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the 2 SSRN,J MACMA No.382 of 2018

deceased, due to which he fell down on the road from his bike, bus

ran over him. The petition was contested by respondent RTC, who

are appellants in the present appeal on the ground that there was

no accident by the said bus and that they disputed the age,

income etc., of the deceased. The father of the deceased was

examined as PW.1, one more witness was also examined on behalf

of the claimants. They marked Exs.A1 to A8 which includes copies

of FIR, charge sheet, PME report, MVI report, qualification of the

deceased etc., The Court below having accepted the contention of

claimants, awarded Rs.7,73,000/- and apportioned the amount on

the parents.

3. The learned counsel fairly conceded the accident,

mainly argued that the Court below awarded excess amount of

compensation, added 50% of future prospects which is against the

finding of judgment in "Insurance Company Vs. PranaySethi

and Ors.1" case, and the amounts awarded under the other heads

are also excess and against the findings of the Hon'ble Apex Court

in Pranay Sethi (supra) case, thereby, sought for reducing the

compensation amount.

    2017 (6) ALT 60 (SC)
                                       3                             SSRN,J
                                                        MACMA No.382 of 2018



      4.     Now the point for consideration is :

Whether the trial Court awarded excess amount, if so, whether award can be set aside by reducing the compensation amount as prayed for?

5. The main claim for my consideration in the present

appeal is about the income of the deceased, addition of 50%

towards future prospects and award of amounts under the other

heads. According to the record placed before this Court, the

respondents/claimants No.1 and 2 lost their son, who was aged

about 23 years, and who was a student with a bright future, in a

road traffic accident. It is true, they did not place any evidence

with regard to the correct income of the deceased. The appellants

did not place any evidence before the Court to believe that the

deceased was not a student. As per the averments made in the

First Information Report and according to the averments made in

PME report,it is clear that the deceased was 23 years old. Even

though, the respondents/claimants were unable to prove that he

was earning some money by attending electrical works etc., it can

safely be presumed that he after completing the Graduation can

easily earn atleast a sum of Rs.200/- per day and Rs.6,000/- per

month. The Court below considered the income of the deceased as

Rs.4,000/- per month. It is true 50% of the above said income is 4 SSRN,J MACMA No.382 of 2018

added as future prospects. The Court below having added 50% of

the said income, considered the income of the deceased as

Rs.6,000/- per month and after deduction of 50% of the income as

his living expenses calculated the loss as Rs.36,000/- per annum

and the Court below having applied '18' multiplier considered the

loss of income as Rs.6,48,000/-. Though no specific evidence is

placed about the actual or expected income of the deceased, he

being a student of 23 years can earn Rs.200/- per day and

Rs.6,000/- per month after completing the graduation and if 40%

of the said income is added as future prospects it is Rs.8,400/-,

thereby, the respondents/claimants could have awarded more

compensation. Therefore, the amount awarded by the Court below

itself is very low. I feel, the conclusion of the trial Court that the

loss of dependency at Rs.6,48,000/- cannot be disturbed.

6. It is true, the Court below awarded Rs.1,00,000/-

towards loss of love and affection, Rs.25,000/- towards

transportation and funeral expenses. It is true in the judgment in

Pranay Sethi (supra) case, the Hon'ble Apex Court was pleased

to observe that an amount of Rs.15,000/- be awarded towards

funeral expenses, Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and

Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium. Since the 5 SSRN,J MACMA No.382 of 2018

respondents/claimants i.e., parents of the deceased are entitled to

Rs.55,000/- each, it would be Rs.1,10,000/- and if Rs.15,000/- is

added towards funeral expenditure again the amount is

Rs.1,25,000/-. Therefore, the amount awarded by the Court

below a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- is also need not be disturbed.

Therefore, there are no merits in the appeal and it is liable to be

dismissed.

7. In the result, appeal is dismissed.

Consequently, Miscellaneous applications if any, are closed.

No costs.

                                 __________________________
                                 JUSTICE SAMBASIVA RAO NAIDU

Date: 04.07.2022
PLV
 6               SSRN,J
    MACMA No.382 of 2018