Telangana High Court
Smt. N.Bhagavathi, vs Sanghi Transport Co., on 13 March, 2025
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA
M.A.C.M.A.No.2873 OF 2019
JUDGMENT:
-
Heard Sri M.Lingam, learned counsel for the appellants and
Sri N.Mohan Krishna, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent
No.2/Insurance Company. Perused the record.
2. This is an appeal preferred by the appellants/petitioners
aggrieved by the Award, dated 22.06.2016 passed in
M.V.O.P.No.2073 of 2013 by the learned Motor Vehicle Accidents
Claims Tribunal-cum-X Additional Chief Jude, City Civil Court,
Hyderabad (for short, 'the Tribunal').
3. The claim petition was filed by the appellants following the
death of the deceased in a road traffic accident which took place on
06.04.2013 at about 5:45 P.M. when he was travelling on
motorcycle bearing No. AP 28C 1521 and was struck by a lorry
bearing No. AP 9Y 5927 which came from back side and dashed the
motorcycle of the deceased.
4. Upon considering the evidence adduced by both the parties,
the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.7,65,000/- along with
interest at 7.5% per annum. Aggrieved by the same, the present
appeal is preferred seeking enhancement on the ground that the
Tribunal failed to consider the income certificate marked under
Ex.A8 which proves that the deceased was earning income of
Rs.10,000/- per month as against Rs.5,000/- considered by the
Tribunal, and failure to consider future prospects. Learned counsel
for the appellants relied on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Rajwati @ Rajjo and others v. United India Insurance
company Limited and others 1, Rasmita Biswal and others v.
Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Limited and
another 2 and Machindranath Kernath Kasar v. D.S.Mylarappa
and others 3.
5. A perusal of the record shows that the appellants have
examined P.W.3, who allegedly is the employer of the deceased, to
depose that the deceased was paid Rs.10,000/- per month as
salary and Ex.A8 is the salary certificate issued by Sri
Venkateswara Stone Polishing and Cutting Industries, Tandur.
According to P.W.3, the deceased worked as Salesman and was
paid salary of Rs.10,000/- per month. As per Ex.A2-charge sheet,
the deceased was doing stone business. Therefore, his income
2023(1) ALT 47 (SC)
2022 ACJ 207
2008 ACJ 1964
cannot be taken at Rs.5,000/- per month, which is slightly higher
than that of an unskilled labourer. The contents of police record do
not support the case of the appellants who have examined P.W.3 to
show that the deceased was a salaried employee. The police record
prima facie shows that the deceased was self employed doing stone
business. Hence, his income can be taken at Rs.7,000/- per
month, which comes to Rs.84,000/- per year.
6. The Tribunal considered the age of the deceased as 37 years, as
mentioned in the Inquest Report and computed the loss of
dependency without granting future prospects.
7. The deceased was aged 37 years as per inquest report and
PME report. Considering the annual income at Rs.84,000/-, as per
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance
Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and others 4, 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/-). From the net annual income of Rs.1,17,600/-. If
1/4th therefrom is deducted towards personal expenses as was
rightly taken by the Tribunal, the annual contribution of the
deceased to the appellants would be Rs.88,200/- (Rs.1,17,600/-
(2017) 16 SCC 680
minus Rs.29,400/-). If the said amount is multiplied by the
appropriate multiplier '15' as was rightly taken by the Tribunal
relying on Sarla Varma v. Delhi Transport Corporation 5, the
total compensation under the head of 'loss of dependency' would be
Rs.13,23,000/-.
8. The Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.25,000/- towards
funeral expenses, Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of estate and
Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium. However, in view of
Pranay Sethi's case (1 supra), the said finding is set aside and the
appellants are granted Rs.33,000/- towards funeral expenses and
loss of estate. Further, appellant No.1 is granted Rs.44,000/-
towards spousal consortium, appellant Nos.2 and 3 are granted
Rs.44,000/- each towards parental consortium and appellant No.4
is granted Rs.44,000/- 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
(2009) 6 S.C.C. 121
(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 the result, M.A.C.M.A. is allowed enhancing the
compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.7,65,000/-
to Rs.15,32,000/- with interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of
petition till the date of realization payable by respondent Nos.1 and
2 jointly and severally. On deposit of the enhanced compensation,
the appellants are permitted to withdraw the entire amount in
proportion to their shares awarded by the Tribunal, without
furnishing any security. However, the appellants are directed to
pay the deficit court fee on the enhanced amount of compensation.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this appeal, shall
stand closed.
_____________________
RENUKA YARA, J
Date: 13.03.2025
ssp
