Madhu Dugar, Hyd 4 Others vs Arthi Agarwal, Hyd Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 1638 Tel

        HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI

                      M.A.C.M.A. No.564 of 2017

JUDGMENT:

Being dissatisfied with the order and decree passed by the

Chairman, Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-XXV

Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in

M.V.O.P.No.361 of 2013 dated 26.02.2016, the claimants have filed

the present appeal.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties have been referred to as

arrayed before the Tribunal.

3. According to the petitioners, on 08-07-2012 the deceased Varun

Dugar and his friends have started from Basheerbagh in a car bearing

No. AP 09 BX 5292 and when they reached near Ohris Hotel,

Basheerbagh at about 1-15 A.M., the driver of the said car drove it in

a rash and negligent manner with high speed and dashed three

pedestrians, one Mahindra car and also one Nano car. As a result of

which, the inmates of the said car including the deceased Varun Dugar

sustained grievous injuries on vital parts of the body and immediately

while shifting to the hospital, the deceased succumbed to injuries.

According to the petitioners, the deceased was aged 22 years, and was

a Director of his business firm and used to earn more than

Rs.5,00,000/- per annum. Thus, the petitioners claimed compensation

of Rs.45,00,000/- under various heads against the respondents 1 and 2,

who are owner and insurer jointly and severally.

4. Respondent No.1 filed counter denying the petition averments.

It is submitted that the car involved in the accident was insured with

the respondent No.2 covering the date of accident and the driver of the

car was having valid driving license as on the date of accident.

5. Respondent No.2 filed counter disputing the manner in which

the accident occurred and the age, avocation and income of the

deceased. It is further contended that the driver of the car along with

his friends had Hukka and consumed liquor on the date of accident

and at mid night while returning home, the driver was under the

influence of Hukka and liquor, lost his control over the said car and

caused the said accident and that the compensation claimed by the

petitioners is excessive.

6. After considering the oral and documentary evidence available

on record, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.24,79,000/-

towards compensation to the appellants-claimants against the

respondent Nos.1 and 2, along with proportionate costs and interest @

8% per annum from the date of petition till the date of decree and

thereafter @ 6% per annum till realization.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned

Standing Counsel for the respondent No.2-ICICI Lombard General

Insurance Company Limited. Perused the material available on

record.

8. The learned counsel for the appellants-claimants has submitted

that although the claimants established the fact that the death of the

deceased-Varun Dugar was caused in a motor accident, the Tribunal

awarded meager amount.

9. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of

respondent No.2-Insurance Company sought to sustain the impugned

award of the Tribunal contending that the Tribunal, after appreciating

the evidence on record, has rightly awarded adequate compensation

and the same needs no interference by this Court.

10. With regard to the manner of accident, there is no dispute.

However, after evaluating the evidence of PWs.1 to 3 coupled with

the documentary evidence available on record, the tribunal rightly

held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of

the driver of the offending car which resulted the death of the

deceased Varun Dugar.

11. With regard to the quantum of compensation, according to the

petitioners, the deceased was aged 22 years, and was a Director of his

business firm and used to earn more than Rs.5,00,000/- per annum.

To prove the earnings of the deceased, the Income Tax Officer,

Hyderabad was examined as PW-4 and he brought the certified copies

of income tax returns verification forms relating to the deceased for

the assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13. He admitted that Exs.X2

and X3 i.e., income tax returns for the assessment years 2011-12 and

2012-13 were filed subsequent to the date of death of the deceased.

As per Ex.X1, the income of the deceased was at Rs.2,07,856/- and

income tax paid was shown as Rs.2,990/-. Therefore, the tribunal

rightly rejected Exs.X2 and X3 which were filed after the death of the

deceased and by considering Ex.X1, has taken the income of the

deceased at Rs.1,74,000/-, which appears to be less. Hence, the

income of the deceased can be taken at Rs.2,04,866/-, which can be

rounded off to Rs.2,05,000/- per annum. Further, in light of the

principles laid down by the Apex Court in National Insurance

Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others1, the claimants are

entitled to future prospects @ 40% of his income, since the deceased

was aged 22 years. Then it comes to Rs.2,87,000/- (2,05,000 + 82,000

= 2,87,000/-). From this, 50% of the actual income is to be deducted

towards personal expenses of the deceased following Sarla Verma v.

Delhi Transport Corporation2 as the deceased was a bachelor. After

deducting 50% of the amount towards his personal and living

expenses, the contribution of the deceased to the family would be

Rs.1,43,500/- per annum (2,87,000 - 1,43,500 = 1,43,500/-). Since

the deceased was 22 years by the time of the accident, the appropriate

multiplier is '18' as per the decision reported in Sarla Verma v. Delhi

Transport Corporation (supra). Adopting multiplier '18', the total

loss of dependency would be Rs.1,43,500/- x 18 = Rs.25,83,000/-. In

2017 ACJ 2700

2009 ACJ 1298 (SC)

addition thereto, the claimants are also entitled to Rs.33,000/- under

the conventional heads as per Pranay Sethi's (supra). Further the

petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are also entitled to filial consortium at

Rs.40,000/- each as per the Magma General Insurance Company

Limited vs. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram3. Thus, in all the

claimants are entitled to Rs.26,96,000/-.

12. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A. is partly allowed by

enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal from

Rs.24,79,000/- to Rs.26,96,000/-. The enhanced amount shall carry

interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of

realization, to be payable by the respondents jointly and severally.

The amount of compensation shall be apportioned among the

claimants in the ratio as ordered by the Tribunal. Since it is reported

that the petitioner No.5/appellant No.5 is died, the compensation

awarded to him shall be distributed among the other petitioners in the

ratio as ordered by the tribunal. The amount shall be deposited within

a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

On such deposit of compensation amount by the respondents, the

2018 Law Suit (SC) 904

claimants are at liberty to withdraw the same without furnishing any

security. There shall be no order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

_______________________ M.G.PRIYADARSINI,J

13.04.2023 pgp