Raichur Hanmanthu And Another vs Ranganna And 2 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 2779 Tel

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 2779 Tel
Judgement Date : 22 July, 2024

Telangana High Court

Raichur Hanmanthu And Another vs Ranganna And 2 Others on 22 July, 2024

           THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

                       M.A.C.M.A No.1138 of 2010

JUDGMENT:

Aggrieved by the award dated 26.03.2010 in O.P.No.661 of 2007

passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-III Addl. District

Judge, (FTC), Mahabubnagar at Gadwal, the claimants have preferred this

appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation.

2. Heard Sri K. Venkatesh Guptha, learned counsel for the

appellants/claimants and Sri G. Vasantha Rayudu, learned standing counsel

for the respondent/Insurance Company and perused the entire material on

record.

3. The claim petition was filed seeking compensation of an amount

of Rs.3,00,000/- and the Tribunal granted compensation of Rs.1,72,000/-

with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of

deposit against respondent No.2/owner of the offending vehicle.

4. The deceased is the unmarried son of claimant Nos.1 and 2.

5. According to the version of the claimants, on the date of accident,

the deceased went for cooli work for loading and unloading of gravel in the

tractor for construction of dam in the limits of Muchupally Village. While

the deceased was sitting in the tractor, it was driven at a high speed, KS, J MACMA_1138_2010

resulting in deceased slipping down and receiving injuries and later died

while undergoing treatment.

6. The learned Tribunal found that the deceased was working as a

cooli for loading and unloading of gravel, however, since the policy

according to RW1 was taken not for commercial purpose but for

agricultural purpose, directed the owner of the tractor to pay compensation.

7. The claimants stated in their petition that the deceased was earning

Rs.150/- per day by doing labour work. However, since no proof was filed

regarding the income, the Tribunal considered the notional income at

Rs.15,000/- per annum. Since the avocation of the deceased as cooli is not

disputed, this Court is inclined to take the monthly income of the deceased

at Rs.3,000/-.

8. While computing the compensation, the future prospects were not

considered by the Tribunal. The Hon'ble Apex Court in case of National

Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi1 has held that while considering the

compensation in cases of death, the future prospects of the self employed

shall also be considered. Having regard to the age of deceased as 20 years

as on the date of accident and occupation as self-employed, if 40 percent of

the income is included as future prospects, the monthly income would come

2017 (6) 170 (SC) KS, J MACMA_1138_2010

to Rs.4,200/- (Rs.3,000+1,200). As per the decision of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Varma v Delhi Transport Corporation 2 ,

50% of the income has to be deducted towards personal expenses as the

deceased was a bachelor which comes to Rs.2,100/-. Thus the annual

contribution of the deceased to the claimants would be of Rs.25,200/-

(Rs.2,100X12). As per Schedule II of the Act, if the said annual

contribution arrived at is multiplied with relevant multiplier to the age of

the claimant i.e.18, the total amount comes to Rs.4,53,600/-. Thus, the

claimants are entitled for the said amount under the head of loss of

dependency.

9. As regards the consortium to be paid, claimant Nos.1 and 2 are

entitled to Rs.40,000/- each towards consortium as decided by the Hon'ble

Apex court in case of Pranay Sethi (1 Supra). With regard to the funeral

expenses and loss of estate, the claimants are entitled for Rs.30,000/-.

10. Therefore, the claimants are awarded the compensation as below:

           Head                                     Compensation awarded

     (1) Loss of dependency                         Rs.4,53,600

     (2) Funeral expenses and Loss of Estate        Rs.30,000





         2009(6) SCC 121
                                                                         KS, J
                                                              MACMA_1138_2010



  (3) Loss of filial consortium                      Rs.80,000(for 1st and 2nd
                                                     claimants)

      Total compensation awarded                     Rs.5,63,600/-

11. The claimants who are parents of the deceased were aged 60 years

and 52 years when the accident had happened. They are illiterates and they

would be now aged more than 70 years. In the said circumstances, keeping

in view the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National

Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Baljit Kaur3, Manuara Khatun Vs. Rajesh Kr.

Singh4 and Anu Bhanvara Vs. Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company

Limited 5, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondent

No.3/Insurance company to pay the compensation amount to the

appellants/claimants in the first instance, and recover the same from the

owner of the tractor/respondent No.2 thereafter.

12. In the result, the Motor Accident Miscellaneous Appeal is

allowed enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal from