Telangana High Court
Bandamidhi Narsimha And 2 Others vs G.Janga Reddy And Another on 28 June, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
M.A.C.M.A No.617 OF 2014
JUDGMENT:
1. Aggrieved by the award, dated 31.01.2012 in O.P.No.1827 of
2009 passed by the XI Additional Chief Judge (Fast Track Court)
City Civil Court, Hyderabad, the appellants have filed this appeal
for enhancement of the compensation amount.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants-claimants and
the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2-Shriram General
Insurance Company Limited.
3. The claimants, who are legal heirs of the deceased have filed
petition seeking compensation before the tribunal on account of the
death of the deceased B.Narender.
4. The deceased along with others, were going on a van bearing
No. AP 29 U 6577 with luggage of vegetables, a lorry which is
offending vehicle driven by its driver in a rash and negligent
manner with high speed came in the opposite direction and hit the
van. As a result, the deceased died on the spot and others received
injuries.
5. According to the claimants, deceased was earning an
amount of Rs.5,000/- per month and contributing the same to the
family. The claimant Nos.1 and 2 are parents and claimant No.3 is
his brother.
6. The learned tribunal having assessed the evidence placed by
the claimants on record, the tribunal found that there was
contributory negligence on the part of the van driver resulting the
accident and accordingly assessed the negligence of 1/3rd to 2/3rd
Keeping in view that it was sudden collision, the negligence can be
treated as 50-50 and accordingly compensation can be granted.
7. In view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case
of Ramachandrappa Vs. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance
Insurance Company Limited, 1 considering age and occupation of
the deceased, this Courts finds that it is just and reasonable to
consider the income of the deceased as Rs.4,500/- per month, as
such his annual income would be Rs.54,000/- (Rs.4,500/- X 12 =
Rs.54,000/-).
8. As per the guidelines of the Hon'ble Apex Court in dictum of
Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2 if the deceased
was unmarried, 50% of his income has to be deducted i.e.,
Rs.27,000/- towards his personal expenses. Thus, the annual
income of the deceased after deducting personal expenses would
(2011) 13 SCC 236
(2009) 6 SCC 121
come to Rs.27,000/- per annum (Rs.54,000/- - Rs.27,000/- =
Rs.27,000/-) and the Hon'ble Apex Court in the dictum of National
Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi 3, held that the
future prospects of the income of a self-employed shall also be
included in determination of the compensation. Thus, considering
the age of the deceased i.e.,21 years, 40% of the income i.e.,
Rs.10,800/- has to be added towards future prospects and thus the
amount would come to Rs.37,800/- (Rs.27,000 + Rs.10,800 =
Rs.37,800/-). This sum, if multiplied with the multiplier 18
applicable to the age of the deceased i.e., 21 years, it would come to
Rs.6,80,400/-(Rs.37,800 X 18 = Rs.6,80,400/-). Thus, appellants
are entitled to Rs.6,80,400/- under the head 'Loss of Dependency'.
9. Besides, appellants herein are also entitled for compensation
under 'conventional heads' as prescribed in the dictum of
National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi, i.e.,
Rs.15,000/- towards loss of Estate and Rs.15,000/- towards
funeral charges and Rs.40,000/-.
10. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, by reiterating the
comprehensive interpretation of 'consortium' given in the authority
of Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram
Alias Chuhru Ram & others 4, and in the authority between
United India Insurance Company Limited vs. Satinder Kaur @
(2017) 16 SCC 680
(2018) 18 SCC 130
Satwinder Kaur and others 5, fortified that the amounts for loss
of consortium shall be awarded to the children who lose the care
and protection of their parents as 'parental consortium' and to the
parents as, 'filial consortium' for the loss of their grown-up
children, to compensate their agony, love and affection, care and
companionship of deceased children. Accordingly, it is just and
reasonable to award Rs.40,000/- each to appellant Nos.1 and 2 as
filial consortium.
11. Therefore, appellants/petitioners are entitled for the
compensation in the following terms:
1. Loss of dependency Rs.6,80,400/-
2. Conventional heads Rs.30,000/-
3. Filial Consortium for children Rs.80,000/-
@ Rs.40,000/- each
TOTAL Rs.7,90,400/-
12. In the result, the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal
is allowed enhancing the compensation awarded by the Tribunal
from Rs.2,74,500/- to Rs.7,90,400/-. The respondent
No.2/insurance company is directed to deposit 50% of the
enhanced compensation amount i.e.,Rs.3,95,200/- with interest at
the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of
realization, within a period of two (02) months from the date of
(2020) 9 SCC 644
receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit, appellants are
permitted to withdraw their respective shares.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand
closed.
_______________________
JUSTICE K.SURENDER
Date : 28.06.2024
ssy
