IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

M.A.C.M.A.No: 3333 of 2009

Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the order and decree in OP No.1255 of 2002 dated 19-08-2004 on the file of the Court of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Cum- XIV Additional Chief Judge (FTC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

Between:

• 1. Smt. D. Lingamma, W/o. Late Ramulu, aged 49 years, Occ:Household,
• 2. D. Laxmamma, D/o. Late Ramulu, aged 24 years, Physically Handicapped.

(Both are R/o.H.No.16-2-689/1/A, Malakpet, Palton, Hyderabad.)

...Appellant/Petitioners

AND

1. M.A.Qayyum, S/o.Shaik Ahmed, Owner of lorry bearing No. AP 13 T 9411 R/o.H.No.9-4-50/37/A, Hakimpet, Hyderabad.

R1 is dismissed for default vide Court Order dated 5-08-09.

2. United India Insurance Company Limited rep., by its Senior Divisional Manager, DO XI, Malakpet, Hyderabad:

(Policy Cover Note No. 455010 valid from 21-9-01 to 20-9-02)

...Respondents/Respondents

Counsel for the Appellants: SRI Y. ASHOK RAJ

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI SRINIVASA RAO VUTLA

The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI M.A.C.M.A.No.3333 of 2009

JUDGMENT:

This appeal is preferred aggrieved by the award passed by the XIV Additional Chief Judge (FTC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in O.P.No.1255 of 2002, dated 19.08.2004.

$\overline{2}$ . Having heard both sides, perused the entire material on record.

The claim petition was filed seeking compensation of an $3.$ amount of Rs.2,95,000/- on account of the death of deceased in the accident that occurred on 10.05.2002 and the tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs. 1, $(00,000/-$ .

The case of the claimant is that on 10.05.2002, the deceased was $4.$ proceeding on the cycle with somebody who was peddling the cycle and he was sitting on the carrier and a lorry driven in the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner came in the wrong side and dashed against the cycle, resulting in the death of the deceased.

$5.$ According to the claimants the deceased was working in a shop and earning an amount of Rs.3,000/-. In support of the same, they examined PW-3. The Court below considering the income at Rs.50/- has granted compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/-.

6. Learned counsel appearing lor claimants submits that the compensation that was arvarded by the tribunat was not reasonable. It is also stated that the deceased is having widorv mother and handicapped sister who are dependent on him.

7. Leamed counsel appcaring lor the Insurance Company submits that the tribunal has rightty granled the cornpensation basing on the eviderlcc and as there is no evidence with regard to thc income, the tribunal has rightly taken Rs.50/- per day and arrived at iust conclusion'

8. The case of the claimants is that the deceased is eaming Rs 3'000/ per month and they have exarnincd PW-3, but the court below has taken Rs.50 per day. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Rsmuchandrappa Vs' Manager' Royal Sundaram Alliancet case, has considered the income as Rs.4,500/- without anyevidence.Asplca<ledinthiscasethattheincomeolthedeceasedis Rs.3,000/-, this Court is inclined to take lts.3,000/- as income'

g. The Hon'ble Apex Court in National lnsurance Co' Ltd' Vs' pranay Sethi2 held that while considering the compcnsation in cases of- death, the future prospects of the self'ernploycd shatl also be considered. Flaving regard to the age and occupation as sclf-cmploycd, if 40 percent of the income is included as future prospects, the r.non1lrly incotne would come to Rs'4'200/-'

¹lzor 11 rs scc ²³⁶

²2ot7 (6) 170 (sc)

As per his age i.e. 19 years as on the date of accident, the appropriate multiplier would be '18'. Since the deceased was a bachelor, his personal and living expenses shall be deducted at 50% which comes to Rs.2,100/-. Hence, the putitioners are entitled to Rs.4.53.600/- (Rs.2,100x12x18) for loss of annual future income due to death of the deceased. As there are two claimants, they are entitled to Rs.44,000/- each towards loss of consortium. which would come to Rs.88,000/- (Rs.44,000 $\times$ 2).

As the Tribunal has granted very meager amount towards funeral $10.$ expenses, this Court is inclined to grant Rs.33.000/- towards funeral expenses and loss of estate and Rs.10,000/- for legal expenses.

$11.$ In the light of the above discussion, the claimants are entitled for the following compensation under different heads:

Heads		<b>Compensation awarded</b>
$(1)$	Loss of consortium	$Rs.88,000/-$
$(2)$	Funeral Expenses	Rs.33,000
$(3)$	Loss of dependency	$Rs.4,53.600/-$
$(4)$	Legal expenses	$Rs.10,000/-$
<b>Total compensation awarded</b>		$Rs.5,84,600/-$

$\overline{3}$

In the result, the Motor Accident Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed $12.$ enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the court below from Rs.2,95,000/- to Rs.5,84,600/- as hereunder:

(a) The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.

(b) The claimants shall pay the court fee on the enhanced amount of compensation.

(c) The insurance company shall deposit the amount within a period of (8) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of judgment. On such deposit, claimants are entitled to withdraw the entire amount without furnishing the security.

(d) Amounts shall be apportioned in terms of the ratio decided by the

Tribunal in the Award.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

Sd/- T. JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Cum- XIV Additional Chief Judge (FTC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad. (with records, if any)

• 2. One CC to SRI Y. ASHOK RAJ, Advocate [OPUC]
• 3. One CC to SRI SRINIVASA RAO VUTLA, Advocate [OPUC]
• 4. Two CD Copies

$ASR-2/kam$

HIGH COURT DATED:21/07/2023

JUDGMENT

MACMA.No.3333 of 2009

$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}$ $\overline{\mathcal{C}}$

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

M.A.C.M.A.No: 3333 of 2009

Between:

• 1. Smt. D. Lingamma, W/o. Late Ramulu, aged 49 years, Occ:Household,
• 2. D. Laxmamma, D/o. Late Ramulu, aged 24 years, Physically Handicapped,

(Both are R/o.H.No.16-2-689/1/A, Malakpet, Palton, Hyderabad.)

...Appellant/Petitioners

AND

1. M.A.Qayyum, S/o.Shaik Ahmed, Owner of lorry bearing No. AP 13 T 9411 R/o.H.No.9-4-50/37/A, Hakimpet, Hyderabad.

R1 is dismissed for default vide Court Order dated 5-08-09.

2. United India Insurance Company Limited rep., by its Senior Divisional Manager, DO XI, Malakpet, Hyderabad.

(Policy Cover Note No. 455010 valid from 21-9-01 to 20-9-02)

...Respondents/Respondents

Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the order and decree in OP No.1255 of 2002 dated 19-08-2004 on the file of the Court of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Cum- XIV Additional Chief Judge (FTC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

ORDER: This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and the material paper in the case and upon hearing the arguments of SRI Y. ASHOK RAJ, Advocate for the Appellants and of SRI SRINIVASA RAO VUTLA, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

• 1. That the M.A.C.M.A. No. 3333 of 2009 be and hereby is allowed enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the tribunal from Rs. 2,95,000/- to Rs. $5!84,600/-;$
• 2. That the enhanced amount shall carry interest at 7.5 % p.a. from the date of $\frac{1}{\text{petition}}$ till the date of realization;
• 3. That the claimants shall pay the court fee on the enhanced amount of compensation;
• 4. That the Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of (8) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of Judgment;
• 5. That on such deposit, claimants be and hereby are entitled to withdraw the entire amount without furnishing the security;
• 6. That the Amounts shall be apportioned in terms of the ratio decided by the $\overline{\mathbf{T}}$ ribunal in the Award.
• 7. That save as aforesaid, the decree of the Lower Court shall stands confirmed in all other respects; and
• 8. That there be no order as to costs in this appeal.

Sd/- T. JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Cum- XIV Additional Chief Judge (FTC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad. 2. Two CD Copies

To,

HIGH COURT DATED:21/07/2023

DECREE MACMA.No.3333 of 2009

ALLOWING MACMA.

$(4)$ $\frac{1}{2}$

$\frac{1}{12}\sqrt{123}$