Telangana High Court
The Divisional Manager / D.O.Xi, vs Hausa Nazarath on 13 February, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
MACMA.No.1985 OF 2008
JUDGMENT:
1. This appeal is preferred by the appellant/R2-Insurance
Company questioning the compensation of Rs.4,73,000/-
awarded in O.P.No.1702 of 2005 on the file of the V Additional
Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-(Mahila Courts) at
Hyderabad, against the claim of the dependants/claimants of
Rs.8 lakhs.
2. Heard learned Standing Counsel appearing for the
appellant-Insurance company and learned counsel for the
claimants.
3. On 20.01.2005 while the deceased was travelling in a
Qualis vehicle bearing No.AP 11 H 9786, the driver of the
Qualis vehicle drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner
and dashed against the lorry coming in the opposite direction,
resulting in injuries to the persons travelling in the Qualis and
the death of the deceased.
4. Learned Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company
would submit that the evidence of PW2 shows that the accident
occurred due to the negligence of the lorry also, for which
reason of contributory negligence, only 50% compensation
could be granted.
5. The said argument is based on the evidence of PW2 who
admitted that the accident is a head on collision. However, he
admitted that the lorry also contributed to the accident. The
said PW2 was sitting in the 'Dhaba' on the main road. The
persons sitting in the 'dhaba' around 2.00 A.M. and his opinion
that the lorry contributed to the accident cannot form basis to
come to a conclusion that the lorry has also contributed to the
accident and only 50% of the compensation can be granted.
6. I see no force in the argument of the counsel appearing
for the Insurance Company. The basis for argument is the
opinion given by PW2 which cannot be considered.
7. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of
respondents/claimants seeks enhancement of the
compensation granted, though they have not filed any appeal or
cross-objections. In support of the said contention he relied on
the Judgment of Honourable Supreme Court in State of
Punjab v. Bakshish Singh 1.
8. He also relied on the Judgment of Honourable Supreme
Court in Surekha w/oRajendra Nakhte and others v.
Santosh s/o.namdeo Jadhav and others [(2021) 16 SCC
467], wherein the Honourable Supreme Court directed to pay
compensation of Rs.49,85,376/- when the High Court found
that the said amount was reasonable, however there was no
cross appeal. The Honourable Supreme Court held that the said
amount can be granted though no cross appeal was filed.
9. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court
finds infirmity with the award passed by the Tribunal in
OP.No.1702/2005, dt.07.06.2007 and claimants are entitled to
enhanced compensation.
10. The deceased was doing stationery business at City Civil
Court, Hyderabad and earning Rs.10,000/- per month. He was
also having licence for carrying on the job typing work in the
Court premises. The Tribunal has taken the income of the
deceased at Rs.4,000/- per month which is very meagre. Hence,
(1998) 8 Supreme Court Cases 222
the same can be considered as to Rs.7,000/- per month. Then
the annual income of the deceased comes to Rs.84,000/- (7000
x 12). In view of the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme
Court in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay
Sethi and others 2, future prospects @ 25% of the income of
the deceased i.e. 21,000/- has to be added which comes to
Rs.1,05,000/-p.a. Since the dependents are 3 members, 1/3rd
of the income i.e. Rs.35,000/-(1,05,000x1/3) has to be
deducted towards personal expenses which comes to
Rs.70,000/-p.a.(1,05,000-35,000). As per the second schedule
of the Motor Vehicles Act the relevant multiplier is '14' and then
the loss of income due to the death of the deceased comes to
Rs.9,80,000/- (70,000 x 14).
11. The compensation granted by the Tribunal to the 1st
claimant towards consortium is enhanced to Rs.40,000/- and
the compensation granted by the Tribunal to the children of the
deceased-R2 and R3 herein towards love and affection is
enhanced to Rs.40,000/- each, which comes to Rs.80,000/-.
Further, the claimants are also granted 15,000/- towards
funeral expenses.
(2017 ACJ 2700 = AIR 2017 SC 5157)
12. In total claimants are entitled to a total compensation of
Rs.11,15,000/- towards compensation.
13. For the reasons stated above and in view of findings by
this Court that the claimants are eligible for enhanced
compensation, the appeal filed by the Insurance Company is
devoid of merits and accordingly, dismissed.
14. The compensation granted by the Tribunal to the
claimants is enhanced to Rs.11,15,000/-with interest @ 7.5%
on the enhanced amount from the date of petition till
realization payable by respondents 1 and 2 in the OP. The
claimants have to pay the deficit Court fee or the Tribunal
may deduct the amount required for the purpose of Court
fee from the amount awarded to the claimants after
respondents Insurance Company deposits the amount
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in
this appeal shall stand closed.
___________________
K.SURENDER, J
13.02.2024
tk
