Telangana High Court
Smt.B.Sulochana And Anr vs Sri K.Ram Reddy And Anr on 22 July, 2024
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
MACMA.No.1364 of 2012
ORDER:
1. The appellants filed petition before the Court below under
Section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation of
Rs.6 lakhs on account of the death of the deceased who is the only
son of the appellants/claimants. According to the claimants, the
deceased while going on a motorcycle on 22.12.2007, as a pillion
rider met with an accident on account of the negligent and high
speed driving of the Tractor bearing No.KA 36T 8752 which is the
offending vehicle.
2. First respondent is the owner and the 2nd respondent is the
Insurer of the offending vehicle.
3. The manner in which the accident has taken place and the
liability is not in dispute.
4. Though the appellants claimed that the deceased was
earning Rs.50,000/- p.a., according to the income certificate-
Ex.A6, the said amount was not considered by the Tribunal while
granting compensation. However, the Tribunal considered the
income of the deceased at Rs.36,000/- p.a.
5. Since the maximum limit of income per annum under
Schedule-II of Motor Vehicles Act, is Rs.40,000/-, the claim of
Rs.50,000/- cannot be considered as income. I do not find any
infirmity with the finding of the Tribunal in considering the
income of the deceased at Rs.36,000/- while granting
compensation.
6. Insofar as the enhancement of compensation claimed by the
claimants in the present appeal is concerned, the deceased was
earning Rs.3,000/- per month.
7. In view of the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme
Court in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi
and others 1, since the deceased was aged 22 years as on the date
of accident, future prospects @ 40% of the income of the deceased
has to be added which comes to Rs.1,200/-. Then the total income
comes to Rs.4,200/-(3,000 + 40%). The annual income of the
deceased comes to Rs.50,400/-p.a. (4,200 x 12). Since the
dependents are 2 in number, 1/3 of the income of the deceased
i.e. Rs.16,800/-(50,400 x 1/3) has to be deducted towards
personal expenses which comes to Rs.33,600/- (50,400 - 16,800).
Since the deceased is a bachelor, the age of the mother has to be
(2017) 16 SCC 680
taken into consideration for adopting the appropriate multiplier.
The age of the mother of the deceased is 45 years. Then, as per
the Judgment of Honourable Supreme Court in Sarla Verma v.
Delhi Transport Corporation 2 the relevant multiplier is '14' and
then the loss of income due to the death of the deceased comes to
Rs.4,70,400/- (33,600 x 14).
8. As per the decision of the Constitutional Bench of Apex court
in case of Pranay Sethi's case, the conventional heads namely
loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses should be
Rs.15,000/-, Rs.40,000/- and Rs.15,000/-, respectively and the
same should be enhanced on percentage basis in every three years
and the enhancement should be at the rate of 10%. Then the total
consortium granted to mother comes to Rs.48,400/- (40,000 +
10% for every three years) and Loss of Estate and funeral
expenses comes to Rs.36,300/- (15,000 + 15,000 + Add 10% for
every three years). An amount of Rs.8,000/- towards medical
expenses granted by the Tribunal remain unaltered.
9. In total claimants are entitled to a total amount of
compensation of Rs.5,63,100/-(4,70,400 + 48,400 + 36,300 +
8,000). Since the 2nd petitioner (father) is not dependent on the
(2009) 6 SCC 121
income of his deceased son, 1st petitioner (mother) is entitled to
total amount of compensation Rs.5,63,100/-.
10. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the compensation
granted by the Tribunal to the claimants is enhanced from
Rs.2,93,300/- to Rs.5,63,100/- 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 amount shall be deposited
within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On
such deposit, the 1st petitioner (mother) is permitted to withdraw
the entire amount without furnishing any security.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in
this appeal shall stand closed.
___________________
K.SURENDER, J
Date: 22.07.2024
tk
