Beldi Suvarna And 2 Others v. Kammari Maruthi And 2 Others

[ 3208 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA M.A.C.M.A. NO: 269 OF 2022 Appeal under Section '173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the Order and decree in M.V.O.P.No. 3064 of 2017 dated 1010312022 on the file of the Court of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - cum - lll Additional Chief Judge City Civil Court at Hyderabad.

Between:

1. Beldi Suvarna, Wo. Late Vittla, aged . 55 Years, Occ. Housewife.

2. Beldi Raju, Wo. Late Vittla, aged . 37 Years, Occ. Milk Business, (lA allowed vide No.940 of 2021).

3. Beldi Rajamma, Wo. Late Gundaiah(died), All are Rl/o. 2-4-998, Nimboliadda, Kachiguda, Hyderabad. ...APPELLANT/CLAIMANT AND

1. Kammari Maruthi, S/o. Kistappa, aged. Major, Occ. Business, 2-69, Yelgoi, Manoor Mandal, Medak District.

2. MAGMA HDI General lnsurance Company Limited, represented by its Manager, Room 301 and 302,3rd Floor, Madhava Towers, T-1-5912 (459i6), Ameerpet, Hyderabad -500 016.

Policy No. P00 1 7 3OOOO5 I 41 921 1 01 844, valid from 01 .O2.2O1 6 to 30.1 1 .2O1 7 .

3. Santosh, S/o. Tuljaram, aged. 31 Years, Occ. Driver, Rl/o. 2-3-163/9, Saibaba Colony, Mangalpet, Narayankhed, Medak District. ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS For the Appellant : SRl. C. M. PRAKASH, Advocate For the Respondents : None Appeared The Court delivered the following : Judgment

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA MACMA No.269 OF 2022 JUDGMENT:

This motor accident civil miscellaneous appeal 1S preferred b.v the appellants/ claimants against the judgment and decree dated 1O.O3.2O22 in M.V.O.P.No.3064 of 2017 passed by the Motor Accidents Tribunal cum-lll-Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad 2.

Heard Iearned counsel for t.l.e appellants. None appears for the reSpondents. Perused the record. 3.

M V.O.P.No.3064 of 2017 was filed by the claimants/dependants of deceased late Vittal seeking compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- on account of death of late Vittal in a road accident. The trial Court, vide order and decree dated 10.03.2022, h.as dismissed the said petition on the ground that the married daughters of the deceased were not added as parties to the petition. 4 .

The order of the trial Court in dismissing the petition basing on the above ground is patently illegal as it

PSS,J M.A.C.M.A. 2@ 2022 is not a suit for partition and is only a petition for entitlement of compensation on account of death of the deceased. Wife of the deceased is alive and as such, she claimed compensation for herself and also for her sons and daughter and she could not add her married daughters as they are already married prior to death of the deceased. The claimants are entitled for compensation on account of death of deceased since the policy was in existence as on the date of accident and only at the time of apportionment of the amount, the Court has to see whether all the legal representatives of the deceased are added as parties or not but merely because the married daughters are not added as parties to the petition, the petition cannot be dismissed on that ground.

5.

However, the learned counsel for the claimants expressed their willingness to add the married daughters of the deceased as parties to the petition. Therefore, the matter is remanded back to the trial Court to dispose of it on merits after considering the contentions of both the parties.

PSS,J M.A.C.M.A. 2A9 2022 J

6. In the result, this petition is disposed of remanding back M.V.O.P.No.3064 of 2Ol7 to the Motor Accidents Tribunal cum-lll-Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad to dispose of it on merits after considering the contentions of both the parties In the facts and circumstalces of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this M.A.C.M.A. sha-Il stand closed. SECTION OFFICER I Sd/. I.NAGALA,KSHMI DEPUTY REGISTRAR '{--- //TRUE COPY// To,

1. The chairman, Motor Accidents claims Tribunal - cum - lll Additional chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad.

2. One CC to SRI. C MOHAN PRAKASH, Advocate tOpUCl

3. Two CD Copies

4. One Spare Copy AKB XrDl

HIGH COURT DATED: 1710612022 f'

n s tt) 'J a-, -t- \\ i.

o

JUDGMENT

a\: iio MACMA.No.269 of 2022 DISPOSING AND REMANDING MACMA WITHOUT COSTS