Telangana High Court
A Saraswathi Hyderabad And 3 Others vs Ashraf Khan Alwar And Anr on 7 March, 2025
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA
M.A.C.M.A.No.693 OF 2019
JUDGMENT:
Heard Sri A.S.Narayana, learned counsel for the appellants,
Sri Kondadi Ajay Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for respondent
No.2/Insurance Company and perused the record.
2. This is an appeal preferred by the appellants/petitioners,
aggrieved by the order, dated 01.04.2014, passed in M.V.O.P.No.2276
of 2012 by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-XXV
Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short, 'the
Tribunal'), wherein an amount of Rs.8,50,000/- has been granted as
compensation, as against the claim of Rs.12,00,000/-.
3. The claim petition was filed following the death of one A.Prem
Kumar in a road traffic accident that took place on 18.07.2012 at
about 9.30 P.M. while crossing the road at Medipalli on the way to
Ghatkesar.
4. In the grounds of appeal, the appellants contended that the
Tribunal erred in granting interest from the date of decree instead of
date of filing of the claim petition and that the Tribunal erred in not
taking the future prospects of the deceased into consideration and
that since the income of the deceased was more than Rs.6,000/- per
month as on the date of his death, 50% has to be awarded towards
future prospects.
5. As per the record, the deceased was aged 39 years as on the date
of his death and the appellants claimed his income to be Rs.10,000/-
per month. The appellants examined P.W.3 to show that the deceased
was a sub-contractor under civil engineers. However, there was no
licence for undertaking contracts. Since there was no proof about the
deceased being a painter and undertaking contract work to do
painting, the notional income was taken as Rs.6,000/- per month by
the Tribunal. Further, the age of the deceased is taken as 39 years by
examining the ages of the mother, wife and children of the deceased.
6. A perusal of Ex.A2-Inquest Report shows that the deceased was
a painter and the same profession is reflected in the charge sheet. The
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal
Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited 1's case, taken the
notional income of an unskilled labourer at Rs.4,500/- per month for
the years prior to the year 2013. The deceased being a painter by
profession is likely to earn more than an unskilled labourer.
Therefore, this Court deems it fit and proper to take the monthly
income of the deceased as Rs.7,000/- per month, which comes to
Rs.84,000/- per year.
(2011) 13 SCC 236
7. The age of the deceased as per Inquest Report is 39 years and as
per charge sheet, his age is 44 years. The Tribunal considered the age
of the deceased as 39 years, as mentioned in the Inquest Report and
computed the loss of dependency without granting future prospects.
As per judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in National
Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and others 2, if future
prospects at 40% i.e., Rs.33,600/- is added to the annual income, the
net annual income comes to Rs.1,17,600/- (Rs.84,000/- +
Rs.33,600/-). Since there are four dependents on the deceased, if
1/4th of the income is deducted towards personal expenses, the
annual contribution of the deceased to the family would be
Rs.88,200/-. If the said amount is multiplied by the appropriate
multiplier '15' as was rightly taken by the Tribunal relying on Smt.
Sarla Varma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation 3, the total
compensation under the head of 'loss of dependency' would be
Rs.13,23,000/-.
8. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/- towards transportation
and funeral expenses and Rs.20,000/- towards loss of love and
affection. However, in view of Pranay Sethi's case (2 supra), the said
2017 ACJ 2700
3 (2009) 6 S.C.C. 121
finding is set aside and the appellants are granted Rs.33,000/-
towards funeral expenses and loss of estate. Further, granted
Rs.44,000/- to appellant No.1 towards loss of spousal consortium,
Rs.44,000/- each to appellant Nos.2 and 3 towards parental
consortium and Rs.44,000/- to appellant No.4 towards filial
consortium.
9. In the light of the above mentioned discussion, the appellants
are entitled to the following amounts under different heads:
Head Compensation awarded
(1) Loss of dependency Rs.13,23,000/-
(2) Funeral expenses and Rs.33,000/-
Loss of Estate
(3) Loss of spousal consortium Rs.44,000/- for
appellant No.1
(4) Loss of parental consortium Rs.88,000/- for appellant
(5) Loss of filial consortium Rs.44,000/- for
appellant No.4
Total compensation awarded Rs.15,32,000/-
10. In so far as interest is concerned, the Tribunal has awarded
interest @ 6% per annum from the date of order till realization. This
Court by relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Rajesh and others v. Rajbir Singh and others 4, inclined to increase
the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal to 7.5% per annum on
entire compensation amount from the date of petition till the date of
realization.
11. Accordingly, the M.A.C.M.A. is allowed. The compensation
awarded by the Tribunal is hereby enhanced from Rs.8,50,000/- to
Rs.15,32,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of
petition till the date of realization. The enhanced compensation
amount shall be deposited by the respondents within a period of
two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. On
such deposit, the appellants are entitled to withdraw the entire
amount in proportion to their shares as apportioned by the
Tribunal, without furnishing any security. However, the appellants
are directed to pay the deficit court fee on the enhanced
compensation. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this appeal, shall stand
closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
___________________
RENUKA YARA, J
Date: 07.03.2025
ssp
2013 ACJ 1403 = 2013 (4) ALT 35
