Telangana High Court
Smt. Kamarthapu Usha Rani, vs Ravi Deeravath on 22 January, 2024
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
M.A.C.M.A.NO.1393 OF 2023
JUDGMENT:
Heard learned counsel Sri K.Venkat Ram Reddy for the
appellants and Sri. A.Ramakrishna Reddy, learned counsel for
respondent-insurance company.
2. The present appeal has been filed by the appellants
claimants challenging the award passed by the Chairman, Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar (for short,
'Tribunal') in M.V.O.P.No.563 of 2017, dated 26.04.2023,
thereby enhancement of compensation.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter will be
referred to as they are arrayed before the Tribunal.
4. The brief factual matrix of the present appeal is as under:
4.1. On 15.05.2017 at about 9.10 a.m, while K.Lokeshwar @
Lokesh (Lokesh Kumar), (hereinafter referred to as the
'deceased'), who was studying Engineering 2nd year E.E.E., at
LNA,J
VBIT College, along with his friend Lakshman Kumar, were
going to Geetanjali Engineering College, Keesara from
Ghatkesar on motor bike with chassis No.MEIRG06210073888,
driven by Lakshman Kumar as rider and the deceased was the
pillion rider, and when they reached near Kondapur village, in
the mean time, the driver of brick lorry bearing registration
No.AP-29-T-5863, who was coming from Keesara, drove the
same in rash and negligent manner and dashed the motor bike.
Due to the said accident, both received severe bleeding injuries.
Immediately, they were shifted to Govt. Hospital, Ghatkesar
and later, the deceased was shifted to Kamineni Hospital, LB
Nagar and from there, he was shifted to NIMS hospital for better
treatment and on the same day, the deceased succumbed to the
injuries while undergoing treatment.
4.2. The Police, Ghatkesar Police Station registered a case in
Crime No.251 of 2017 against the driver of the crime vehicle
under Section 304-A and 337 of IPC.
4.3. The claimants, i.e., the parents have filed claim petition
against driver, driver of the crime vehicle and insurance
LNA,J
company under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and
Rule 514 of A.P.Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 read with Section
140 of MV Act, before the Tribunal claiming compensation of
Rs.15,00,000/- along with interest from the date of the petition
till the date of realization.
4.4. The deceased was aged 21 years and hale and healthy
prior to the accident and was brilliant student and was getting
good grading in his academic and was having a good career and
the deceased after passing B.Tech., he would have to get
minimum salary of Rs.15,00,000/- per month and on account
of death of the deceased, the claimants had suffered a lot of
pain, mental agony and became destitute and unable to
maintain themselves.
5. The respondent Nos.1 and 3, who are the owner and
driver of the offending vehicle, remained ex-parte.
6. The respondent no.2-Insurance Company filed counter
denying all the allegations made in the claim petition and
contended that the alleged accident occurred due to involvement
of two vehicles viz., crime vehicle and motor bike, but owner and
LNA,J
insurer of said motor bike are not arrayed as parties and
therefore, the claim petition is liable to be dismissed for non-
joinder of necessary parties and finally prayed for dismissal of
the claim petition.
7. On the basis of the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed
the following issues:
i) Whether the deceased Lokesh Kumar died in a
motor vehicle accident occurred on15.05.2017 at
about 9.10 hours, while the deceased was
proceeding to Geetanjali Engineer College, Keesara
from Ghatkesar on Yamaha-R-15 Motor cycle chasis
no.MEIR GO 6120073888 along with his friend
Lakshman Kumar as pillion rider, due to rash and
negligent driving of driver of brick lorry bearing
No.AP-20-T-5863 ?
ii) Whether the claimants are entitled for
compensation, if so from whom ?
iii) To what relief?
8. In order to substantiate the case, on behalf of the
claimants, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A1 to A7 were
marked. On behalf of the appellant-insurance company, no
witness was examined, however, copy of insurance policy was
marked as Ex.R1.
LNA,J
9. The Tribunal, on due consideration of evidence and
material placed on record, came to conclusion that the deceased
died in a motor vehicle accident, which took place due to rash
and negligent driving of the crime vehicle and awarded
compensation of Rs.14,70,800/- along with interest @ 7.5% p.a.
from the date of petition till the date of deposit. The respondents
1 to 3 are liable to pay the said compensation amount.
10. During the course of hearing of the appeal, learned
counsel for appellants submitted that the Tribunal failed to
award just compensation and the Tribunal not properly
assessed the income of the deceased. He submitted that
deceased would have good career after passing B.Tech., and
would get salary of Rs.15,00,000/- per annum, however the
Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/-
per month only and finally prayed to allow the appeal. In
support
11. On the other hand, learned counsel for insurance
company submitted that the Tribunal, on due consideration of
the evidence and material placed on record, had rightly awarded
LNA,J
the compensation and there are no grounds to interfere with the
award of the Tribunal.
Consideration:
12. The main contention raised by the learned counsel for the
appellants is that the Tribunal grossly erred in taking the
monthly income of the deceased.
13. In B.Ramulamma vs. Venkatesh Bus Union,
Lingarajapuram, Bangalore and another 1, the Division Bench
of erstwhile High Court of A.P., held as under:
"48. During famine relief work, a provision was inserted for
payment of less than minimum wage fixed under Minimum
Wages Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sanjit Roy v. State of
Rajasthan, 1983 LIC 312, observed that the provision inserted
for payment of less than minimum wage is violative of Article
14 of the Constitution of India.
49. Taking the gross salary of the Computer Engineers
working in IT field or holding that the deceased would not have
earned anything or taking meager income of the deceased,
appears to be unreasonable and illogical. In view of the same,
we are of the view that the salary of, an employee, who is the
classmate of the deceased, when he entered into service in any
Government or private sector, after completing any course of
B.Tech or M.Tech course, can be taken as basis for
determining the income of the deceased. It is common
knowledge and not disputed across the bar that the basic pay
of a new entrant into the Government or private sector, who
possesses B.E or B.Tech qualification, is Rs. 8,000/- and his
total emoluments are not less that Rs. 20,000/- per month. In
2009 SCC Online AP 565
LNA,J
Central Government, the basic salary of an engineering
graduate as per revised scales is Rs. 15,600/- per month and
plus grade pay is in between Rs. 5,000/- to Rs. 6,000/- per
month. Even research scholars are getting more than Rs.
10,000/- per month. In the notification No. 36/2008, dated
30.12.2008, issued by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service
Commission, Hyderabad, for the post of Assistant Executive
Engineer in various departments, the prescribed qualification
is shown as B.E./B.Tech in Civil/Mechanical/Electrical
Engineering and the scale of pay is shown as Rs. 9285-
21550/-.
50. As discussed above, since there is no guarantee of
employment in I.T. sector, and there may be uncertainties in
case of private companies, it may be more appropriate,
reasonable and rationale to take the minimum wage or salary
at entry level fixed by the Government to such jobs, which the
deceased after completing their course, would have got.
Therefore, the basic salary of the new entrant into the
profession, who is the classmate of the deceased, should be
taken as basic for determining the income of a deceased, who
died in a motor accident while studying.
51. There cannot be any controversy to say that the payment
of wages less than the minimum wage is an offence. Nobody
can deny the fact that the minimum wages have been fixed
taking into consideration several factors to fulfill the basic
needs of a worker and therefore, the same can be taken as
basis for determining the income of a workman. It is common
knowledge that the workers are being paid much more than
the prescribed minimum wages in many scheduled
employments. Therefore, where in a case it is proved that the
deceased was earning more than the prescribed minimum
wage, the same should be taken as criteria for fixing his
income ignoring the minimum wages prescribed. Therefore, for
all the scheduled employment, for which minimum wages have
been fixed, the same can be taken as basis for determining the
income of a workman or employee, who died in a motor
accident. The agricultural workers, Technicians, Drivers,
Electricians, shop employees, all most all categories of workers
and employees have been covered under the schedules of
Minimum Wages Act. Where there is no scheduled employment
prescribed under the Minimum Wages Act, the wage can be
fixed basing on the wages fixed to the worker or employee who
does similar nature of work. That means the income of a
worker can be determined basing on the income earned by a
worker doing the similar work. For non-scheduled jobs the
salary fixed by the Government at entry level can be taken as
LNA,J
guidance. The job, which the deceased would have secured had
he not died in the Motor accident, and the salary of his
classmates should be the basis. Similarly where the students
have acquired basic qualifications such an Electrician, Fitter,
Technician, Driver etc., and who died or sustained permanent
disability, their income may be fixed on the basis of the income
prescribed under the Minimum Wages Act or on the basis of
the income earned by the newly appointed persons to such
jobs whichever is on higher side. As far as the students, who
completed or in final year or last semester of B.Tech., B.E.,
B.C.A. M.Tech., ME., or MBA, MCA., etc., courses and who
died in motor accidents or sustained permanent disability,
their salaries also can be fixed on the basis of the salary of
their classmates when they entered into jobs. Some percentage
say e.g., 10% per year can be deducted in respect of the
students studying III year or II year as the case may be.
52. In view of the present salaries, being earned by the
Computer Engineers, there cannot be any doubt to say that
the deceased would have minimum Rs. 12,000/- to Rs.
15,000/- per month. It has to be seen that now-a-days IVth
class employees are also getting minimum Rs. 7,000/- to Rs.
10,000/- per month depending upon their service. The Junior
Assistants are also getting Rs. 12,000/- to Rs. 15,000/- per
month. Therefore, considering the normal scales being earned
by the Government employees and also the minimum wage
scales fixed to the technical persons, we are of the view that
the minimum salary of a technical person, who is holding a
bachelor degree in computers or electronics or mechanical, can
be taken as Rs. 12,000/- per month. Therefore, the income of
the graduates in engineering i.e., B.Tech., cannot be fixed less
than Rs. 12,000/- per month, otherwise it amounts to
neglecting the ground of reality. Similarly those who have
completed M.Tech., MCA, MBA, the income of such persons
can be fixed a little higher i.e., at Rs. 15,000/- per month. This
will take care of the additional income which they would have
earned in course of their service."
14. In the above decision, while sixteen students including both
the deceased were proceeding on eight motor vehicles on a holiday
trip, met with an accident. Both the deceased were studying B.E.
computers final year. In the said judgment, several aspects
LNA,J
regarding probable income of the Engineering Graduates were
discussed at length. On elaborate consideration of the legal
position and the facts in the above case, the Division Bench has
fixed the minimum income of a B.E. Graduate at Rs.12,000/- per
month and also held that some percentage say e.g. 10% per year
can be deducted in respect of the students studying III year or II
year as the case may be.
15. In a recent decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this
Court in MACMA No.3353 of 2014, dated 09.08.2023, while
following the decision B.Ramulamma (supra), had taken the
monthly salary of the deceased at Rs.15,000/-, who met with an
accident. The deceased in the said case was completed his B.Tech
and was working as Site Engineer/Supervisor.
16. In the light of factual background of the case, discussion and
legal position, this Court is of the considered opinion that monthly
income of the deceased can be taken at Rs.15,000/- per month
being a student pursuing graduation. Following the decision of the
Hon'ble Division Bench in B.Ramulamma (supra), since the
deceased was studying in Engineering 2nd year E.E.E., by the date
of accident and remaining two years for completing the engineering
LNA,J
course, 10% per year can be deducted in respect of the deceased
studying II year. After deducting 10% per year i.e., 20% per two
years, the monthly income of the deceased comes to Rs.12,000/-
(Rs.15,000/- - Rs.3,000/-). Therefore, the monthly income of the
deceased is liable to be modified accordingly.
17. Insofar as the quantum of compensation on other counts,
the Tribunal had rightly quantified the compensation on all
counts and no ground is made out to interfere by this Court in
respect of other counts awarded by the Tribunal.
Conclusion:
18. In view of the above discussion, the compensation amount
is recalculated as under:
Sl.No. Head Compensation awarded
1 Income Rs.1,44,000/- per annum
(Rs.12,000/- per month)
2 Future prospects Rs.57,600/- (40% of income)
3 Total income Rs.2,01,600/-
2 Deduction towards personal Rs.1,00,800/- (i.e., 50% of total
expenses income )
3 Net Income Rs.1,00,800/- (i.e., Rs.2,01,600/- (-)
Rs.1,00,800/-)
LNA,J
5 Loss of dependency Rs.18,14,400/- (i.e., Rs.1,00,800/-
x 18)
6 Consortium (Rs.40,000/- x 2) Rs. 80,000/-
7 Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/-
8 Loss of estate Rs. 15,000/-
Total compensation to be Rs.19,24,400/-
paid:
19. In the result, Appeal is partly allowed and the impugned
award passed by the Tribunal insofar as compensation amount
is concerned, is modified, subject to payment of court fee on
enhanced compensation amount. The above compensation
amount shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of
the claim petitions till the date of realization. The claimants are
entitled to the apportionment of the amount as directed by the
Tribunal. There shall be no order as to costs.
20. Pending miscellaneous applications if any shall stand
closed.
__________________________________
LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY,J
Date: 22.01.2024
kkm
