Telangana High Court
Nazima Begum And Another vs Mohd. Moin And Another on 22 September, 2022
Bench: G.Anupama Chakravarthy
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
M.A.C.M.A.No.4341 of 2008
JUDGMENT :
This appeal is arising out of the orders in MVOP.No.877 of
2003, dated 07.02.2006 on the file of the XII Additional Chief
Judge (FTC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad.
2. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred to as
arrayed in the O.P.
3. The appellants are the claimants. The O.P. was filed by the
claimants seeking compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- on account of
death of the deceased/Chand Pasha, in the accident which occurred
on 27.10.2003 at 11.00 p.m., while the deceased was returning
house on his scooter bearing No.AP-11-B-7707 from
Vanasthalipuram and when he reached ring road, one DCM Van
bearing No.AP-10-T-1114 in high speed, rash and negligent
manner, dashed against the scooter of the deceased, for which, he
fell down, sustained serious injuries, shifted to Osmania
Government Hospital and succumbed to injuries while undergoing
treatment on 28.01.2003 at 2:30 a.m. Basing on the complaint of
GAC, J
MACMA.No.4341 of 2008
the family member of the deceased, a case was registered against
the driver of the Van in Crime No.53 of 2003 for the offence under
Section 304-A of IPC. The claimants are the parents of the
deceased.
4. A detailed counter affidavit was filed by the respondent
disputing the age, income and driving licence of the deceased. It
was further contended that there was no negligence on the part of
the driver of the Van.
5. The Tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary
evidence on record, has come to a conclusion that the claimants are
entitled for a compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- with interest @ 7.5%
per annum and apportioned the said amount to the claimants.
6. Being aggrieved as to the quantum of compensation awarded
by the Tribunal, the claimants have filed this appeal for
enhancement of compensation. So, the appreciation of evidence
would be with respect to the quantum alone.
GAC, J
MACMA.No.4341 of 2008
7. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the
record.
8. It is contended by the learned counsel for the claimants that
the Tribunal has erred in fixing the income of the deceased as
Rs.3,000/- per month. It is further contended by the counsel for the
appellant that the deceased was an Electrician and used to earn
Rs.6,500/- per month and the Tribunal has also erred in making
calculation by deducting 1/3rd instead of 1/2 as the deceased was an
unmarried person and that the claimants are entitled for
compensation under other conventional heads and prayed to allow
the appeal.
9. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent-
Insurance Company contended that there is no error or irregularity
in the orders passed by the Tribunal so as to interfere with the same
and therefore, prayed to dismiss the Appeal confirming the
judgment of the Tribunal.
10. On perusal of the entire evidence on record, there is no
dispute as to the manner of the accident which occurred on
GAC, J
MACMA.No.4341 of 2008
27.01.2003. PW-1 is the mother of the deceased, who deposed
about the age of the deceased as 22 years as on the date of accident
and the income of the deceased as Rs.4,000/- per month as an
Electrician. Exs.A-1 and A-5 are the FIR and charge sheet in
Crime No.53 of 2003 on the file of L.B.Nagar Police Station.
Exs.A-2 and A-3 are the inquest report and Postmortem report of
the deceased, which clearly disclose that the deceased died in a
motor vehicle accident due to the rash and negligent act of the
driver of the Van. Ex.A-4 is the MVI report, which clearly
disclose that there are no mechanical defects in the Van at the time
of accident. The charge sheet disclose that the driver of the Van
drove the Van in a rash and negligent manner and hit the deceased,
as a result, the death of the deceased occurred. The oral evidence
of PW.1 and the documentary evidence in Exs.A-1 to A-5
corroborates with each other as to the manner in which the accident
had occurred and as to the age of the deceased. No documentary
evidence is placed before the Tribunal to prove the income of the
deceased as Rs.4,000/- per month. As per the proposition laid in
Ramachandrappa vs. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance
GAC, J
MACMA.No.4341 of 2008
Insurance Company Limited1, the income of the deceased was
taken as Rs.4,500/- per month as Labour even in the absence of
documentary evidence for the incident occurred in the year 2003.
Taking into consideration the said proposition, the earnings/income
of the deceased is fixed as Rs.4,500/- p.m.
11. On perusal of the order of the Tribunal, it is evident that the
Tribunal has awarded Rs.3,00,000/- towards future loss of income
restricting the claim, though the loss of earnings have been
calculated to Rs.6,12,000/-.
12. Admittedly, the deceased was aged about 22 years as on the
date of the accident and as stated supra the income of the deceased
can be taken as Rs.4,500/- per month. If 40% future prospects is
added, it would come to Rs.6,300/- (Rs.4,500+1800). As the
deceased is an unmarried person, 50% of his earnings has to be
deducted towards his personal expenses. Thus, his contribution
towards family would come to Rs.3,150/-. As per the judgment of
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Smt.Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport
(2011) 13 SCC 236
GAC, J
MACMA.No.4341 of 2008
Corporation & another2, the multiplier applicable is '18' for the
age group of 21 to 25 years. If the annual income and multiplier
'18' are applied, then, the loss of earnings of the deceased would
be Rs.6,80,400/- (Rs.3,150 X 12 X 18).
13. As per the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in National
Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi & others3, claimants 1 and 2
are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each towards consortium and
Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses and another Rs.15,000/-
towards loss of estate.
14. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the compensation under
the following heads;
1. Loss of dependency Rs.6,80,400/-
2. Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/-
3. Consortium (Rs.40,000/- each) Rs.80,000/-
4. Loss of estate Rs.15,000/-
TOTAL Rs.7,90,400 /-
15. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of, granting a total
compensation of Rs.7,90,400/- with costs and interest at the rate of
7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation.
(2009) 6 SCC 121
2017 ACJ 2700
GAC, J
MACMA.No.4341 of 2008
Both the appellants/claimants being the parents of the deceased, are
equally entitled for the said amount and they are permitted to
withdraw the same, as the accident occurred in 2003.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed.
________________________________
G.ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY, J
Date: 22.09.2022
dv
