B.Narsa Reddy, vs A.Kasi Reddy,
2023 Latest Caselaw 785 Tel

                                   1                            RRN, J
                                                       MACMA No.3300 of 2014

 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

                        MACMA No.3300 OF 2014

JUDGMENT:

Aggrieved by the Order and decree dt.30.08.2013 in

O.P No.933 of 2011 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accidents

Claims Tribunal-Cum-X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil

Court, Hyderabad, (for short "the Tribunal"), the claimants

preferred the present appeal seeking enhancement of

compensation.

2. The appellants/claimants filed the claim petition before

the Tribunal seeking Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation and the

Tribunal, vide the aforesaid order, awarded the complete amount of

Rs.10,00,000/- with costs and interest @7.5% per annum from the

date of petition till the date of realization as prayed for.

3. The appellants/claimants filed I.A. No.2 of 2014

(MACMAMP No.4370 of 2014) before this Court for

enhancement of compensation from Rs.10,00,000/- to

Rs.25,00,000/- and the said IA was allowed.

4. It is the specific contention of the appellants that the

Tribunal failed to award future prospects which is to be added to

the salary of the deceased. It is the further contention 2 RRN, J MACMA No.3300 of 2014

of the appellants that the Tribunal failed to arrive at the proper

monthly income of the deceased and submitted that the

Tribunal ought to have considered Rs.15,252/- per month.

However, the learned Counsel for the appellants submitted

that Rs.2,400/- along with Rs.252/- is to be deducted towards

professional tax, which would mean that the salary for the

purpose of calculating loss of dependency is Rs.12,600/-

(Rs.15,252 - Rs.2,652). He further contended that the

appellants/petitioners are entitled to the benefit of the

compensation under the conventional head as per National

Insurance Company Ltd., V Pranay Sethi1. The appellants

are further entitled to the consortium at Rs.40,000/- each as

the Tribunal failed to grant the said compensation under the

said heads.

5.                 Heard      learned        Counsel         for         the

appellants/petitioners          and     learned   counsel   for    the   2nd

respondent/Insurance Company.

6. The monthly earnings of the deceased is to be taken

at Rs.12,600/- as submitted by the learned Counsel for the

appellants instead of Rs.12,000/- per month which was

(2017) 16 SCC 680 3 RRN, J MACMA No.3300 of 2014

considered by the Tribunal. Thus, the annual income of the

deceased is Rs.12,600/- x 12 = Rs.1,51,200/-.

7. As per Pranay Sethi (supra), the future prospects

to be added is to be considered as 40%, as the deceased was

below 40 years of age i.e Rs.1,51,200/- + 40% (Rs.60,480/-) =

Rs.2,11,680/-. Since the deceased was a bachelor half of the

above amount is to be deducted towards personal expenses

which comes to Rs.1,05,840/-(Rs.2,11,680 - Rs.1,05,840/-).

Considering the age of the deceased, the multiplier for

calculation of loss of dependency as per Sarla Verma Vs.

Delhi Transport Corporation2 is 18. Hence, Rs.1,05,840/- x

18 = 19,05,120/-.

8. The Tribunal has not granted any amount under the

head loss of estate. Hence, the appellants/petitioners are

entitled to compensation towards loss of Estate at Rs.15,000/-

and funeral expenses was awarded by the Tribunal at

Rs.5,000/-, which is hereby enhanced to Rs.15,000/-, by

adding 10% to the above heads as per Pranay Sethi (supra),

the appellants are entitled to Rs.30,000/- + 3,000/- =

(2009) 6 SCC 121 4 RRN, J MACMA No.3300 of 2014

Rs.33,000/-. The appellants Nos. 1 and 2 are entitled to

Rs.40,000/- each towards filial consortium as per Magma

General Insurance Company Limited V. Nanu Ram alias

Chuhru Ram3 which comes to Rs.80,000/-.

9. Accordingly, the appellants are entitled to

Rs.19,05,120/- (Loss of dependency) + Rs.33,000/- (under

conventional heads) + Rs.80,000/- (Filial consortium). In all,

Rs.20,18,120/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh, eighteen thousand, one

hundred and twenty only).

10. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part and

accordingly, the order and decree dt.30.08.2013 in O.P No.933

of 2011 passed by the Tribunal is modified by enhancing the

compensation from Rs.10,00,000/- to Rs.20,18,120/- (Rupees

Twenty Lakh, eighteen thousand, one hundred and twenty

only) with interest at the rate of 7.5% on the enhanced amount

from the date of petition till the date of realization.

Respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the

compensation amount. The compensation amount shall be

apportioned among the appellants/claimants in the same

(2018) 18 SCC 130 5 RRN, J MACMA No.3300 of 2014

proportion in which original compensation amounts were

directed to be apportioned by the Tribunal. The claimants are

directed to pay the deficit Court fee within one month from the

date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. Similarly, the

respondents are directed to deposit the above said amount

with interest and costs after deducting the amount, if any,

deposited earlier within one month from the date of receipt of

certified copy of this judgment. There shall be no order as to

costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any,

pending in this appeal, shall stand closed.

______________________________________ NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, J

14th day of February, 2023 BDR