Ramakkapet Gunti Lachaiah Anr vs Sri P.V.Prasad Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 3565 Tel

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 3565 Tel
Judgement Date : 8 July, 2022

Telangana High Court

Ramakkapet Gunti Lachaiah Anr vs Sri P.V.Prasad Anr on 8 July, 2022

Bench: N.Tukaramji

     HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI

                   MACMA.No.520 of 2007

JUDGMENT:

Heard the learned counsel for the appellants Sri Molugu

Karishna Reddy and learned counsel for 2nd respondent

Smt. M.Bhaskara Lakshmi.

2. In this appeal, the appellants/petitioners (hereinafter 'the

petitioners') are seeking enhancement of compensation granted

in the decree and award dated 02.11.2006 in M.V.O.P.No.100 of

2006 on the file of the Special Judge for Trial of Offences under

SC/ST (POA) Act-cum-V-Additional District and Sessions Judge,

Medak at Sangareddy.

3. The husband and son of Ananthavva/deceased, who died in

the vehicular accident dated 23.04.2004, filed the claim petition

for compensation of Rs.2,50,000/-.

4. The brief facts of the case are that on 23.04.2004, while

Ananthavva/deceased and others were proceeding in auto

bearing registration No.AP23U 2640, near poultry farm of one

Narayana, in the outskirts of Nizampet village, one lorry bearing 2 NTR,J MACMA_520_2007 registration No.AP11T 7146, driven in rash and negligent manner

at high speed, came in opposite direction and dashed the auto,

which caused the instantaneous death of Ananthavva/deceased.

Thus, the petitioners pleading loss of dependency and other

heads, filed the petition for compensation.

5. The learned Tribunal, considering the evidence, granted

Rs.2,50,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of

petition, till the date of realization with proportionate costs. The

insured and the insurer/the respondents were jointly and

severally held liable.

6. In the appeal, the petitioners contested that while

evaluating the compensation, proper multiplier was not employed

and the future prospect was not considered and meager amounts

were granted under conventional heads, hence prayed for

reassessment and for granting just compensation.

7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for 2nd

respondent/insurer (hereinafter 'the respondent') pleaded that

the Tribunal had properly considered the material placed by the

petitioners and appropriate amounts were granted towards 3 NTR,J MACMA_520_2007 compensation. Further, there is no infirmity in the impugned

award, therefore prayed for confirming the award.

8. I have carefully considered the pleadings and perused the

material on record.

9. It is pertinent to note that, in the award, though the

Tribunal arrived at the compensation of Rs.3,55,440/-, restricted

to the petitioners claimed amount of Rs.2,50,000/-. Be that as it

may, there is no dispute in regard to the involvement of the

lorry, rash and negligent driving of the vehicle and causing

accident and the consequent death of Ananthavva/deceased.

11. The petitioners pleaded that the Ananthavva/deceased was

aged about 35 years and was earning Rs.3,000/- per month by

doing agriculture work; However, these facts are not

substantiated by any specific material. However, the learned

Tribunal deduced the age by the notings in the post mortem

examination report/Ex.A4 and by considering the occupation, a

daily wage at Rs.100/-. These conclusions are found reasonable,

accordingly affirmed. In additon, as Ananthavva/deceased falls

in the category of self employed and considering the age, 40% of

the income shall be added towards future prospects and as the 4 NTR,J MACMA_520_2007 dependents are two in number, 1/3rd of the income shall be

deducted for the personal expenses, whereby the annual

contribution of the Ananthavva/deceased to the petitioners would

be of Rs.33,600/-(Rs.36,000 + 14,400-16,800). If this sum is

multiplied with the relevant multiplier to the age of the deceased,

the sum works out to Rs.5,37,600/- (Rs.33,600 x 16). The

petitioners are entitled to this amount towards 'loss of

dependency'.

12. Further, the appellants/petitioners are also entitled for

compensation under the conventional heads, viz., Rs.15,000/-

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

That apart, the 1st appellant/petitioner is entitled for spousal

consortium at Rs.40,000/- and 2nd petitioner is entitled for

parental consortium at Rs.40,000/-.

13. Thus, in total, the petitioners on reappraisal are eligible for the compensation as follows :

         DESCRIPTION                           AMOUNT (Rs.)
Loss of Dependency                                  5,37,600.00
Loss of Estate                                        15,000.00
Funeral Charges                                       15,000.00
Spousal consortium                                    40,000.00
Parental consortium                                   40,000.00
                                 TOTAL             6,47,600.00
                                    5                            NTR,J
                                                       MACMA_520_2007

14. For the aforesaid reasons, the Appeal is allowed as follows:

(i) the respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay

Rs.6,47,600/- (Rupees six lakhs, forty seven thousand, six

hundred only) with interest @ 7.5% per annum with costs, from

the date of petition till date of realization;

ii) the respondents are directed to deposit the awarded

amount within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of

this judgment;

(iii) the apportionment among the petitioners shall be in

terms of the tribunal award.

(iv) on deposit of the awarded amount, the petitioners

are permitted to withdraw entire amounts, as apportioned.