Perumbudoori Sudershan And Another v. Marshiti Venkati And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER rWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA M.A.C.M.A. Nos. : 9'15 OF 2013 and 2481 of 2015 Appeal Under Section 173 of M.V.Act aggrieved by the decree and judgment dated 14-11-2012 in MVOP No. 61 1 of 2008 on the file of the Court of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal -cum- District Judge, Adilabad Between:

Baiai Allianz General Insrlrance Comoan,r Itd Ren bv its Branch lvlanaoer Branch t)iir,;,' il , i ..... l ,..APPELLANT/ R -2 AND 1 . Perumbudoori Sudershan S/o P. Doddaiah, occ Police Constable Rl/o H.NO.4-9-79,Rickshaw Colony, Adilabad

2. P. Vrjaya, W/o Perummbudoori Sudershan, occ Household R/o H.No.4-9-29, Rickshaw Colony, Adilabad.

3. tMarshiti Venkati, S/o Ramulu Occ: Owner of Tractor and Trailor No. . AP 01 V 2808 and AP. 01 V 2884, R/o Lakeruvada Village, tir'landal Jainath Adilabad District.

...RESPONDENTS/ Petitioner & R 1 l.A. NO: 2OF 2013(MACMAMP. NO: 2105 OF 2013) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased stay of execution of the decree and all fu(her proceedings passed in MVOP No.611/2008, da\ed14.11.2012 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Cum District Judge , Adilabad Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. N. MOHAN KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 : SRI S. SURENDER REDDY

h, -.f+r5:.rM.A.C.M.A. NO:248'l oF 2015 Appeal Under Section '173 of M.V.Act aggrieved by the decree and judgment daled 14-11-2012 in MVOP No. 611 o 2oo8 on the file of the court of the chairman, Motor Accident claims Tribunal -c um- District Judge, Adilabad Between:

'l . Perumbudoori Sudershan S/o Doddaiah, Occ police Constable, Resident of H.no. 4-9-79, Rikshaw Colony, Adilabad, Adilabad District

2. P.Yijaya, W/o Perumbudoori Sudershan Occ Household Resident of H.no. 4_ 9-79, Rikshaw Colony, Adilabad, Adilabad District ...APPELLANTS/ PETITIONER AND 1 li4arshiii Vr-.nkatj , S,i o Ranruiu Occ Ornrner of Tractor ancj T r ritor. l'lo hPO1 V 2tluu and APOiv 28E4, R/o Lakeruvada Vrilage, Jainath lvlarrdal. Adrtabad Dist i i,'r:. i;.]1.t;..,it::;.-: uet teial inSut,:nuu Loitrlr.t:ry Lttntied, Xc; . ly t:; Iri.ltrcit I\,4anager, branch Office, Hyderabad.

...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. S. SURENDER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI LAKKADI DAYAKER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No. 2 : SRI N. MOHANA KRISHNA The Court delivered the following Judgment :

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDTIA M.A.C.M.A.Nos.915 of 2013 AND 2481 of 2015 COMMON JUDGMENT:

M.A.C.M.A.No.9 t 5 of 2O13 is filed by the Insurance Company against the judgment and decree dated 14.71.2012 passed in M.V.O.P.No.611 of 20O8 on the file of Chairman, MACT-cu m-Dis trict Judge, Adilabacl.

\{.A.C.\1 A.\"o..]-i,S I oj 2Ol li js iilcrl b,.' thc r:l:lrlants ,irlillii:i iirr- -.it :-.:r:1-r ,; tri r,, :r r ,,., .. , . ,, l.,rl lLtssr:ri i;t M.V.O.P.No.611 of 2008 on the file of Cl'rairman, MACT-cumDistrict Judge, Adilabad this appeal is filed. 3.

In M.A.C.M.A.No.915 of 2013, it is mainly contended that there is no negligence of the driver and electrocution is not covered under the policy and further contended that the learned Tribunal wrongly granted Yz of the deduction on income towards personal expenses as the deceased is unmarried and also stated that interest is to be granted @ 6%o per annum and not 7%o per annum.

4.

M.A.C.M.A.No.2487 of 2O15 is filed by the parents of deceased claiming compensation of Rs.3,60,00O/- for death of the deceased due to accident occurred. But the trial Court granted an amount of Rs.3,24,0OO/- towards compensation with an interest @ 7o/o per annum from the date of application

till the date of deposit. Therefore, requested thrs Court to modify the judgment passed by the trial Court. 5.

Heard learned counsel for the claimants and no representation on behalf of the counsel for the Insurance Company.

6.

In M.A.C.M.A.No.2481 of 2O15 it is mainly contended that deceased was aged about 22 years and used to earn Rs.3,30O/- pcr nionth bv u'r-rriti:tg as tr-itor, bltl titt: 1I i:rl CoLtt 1 \"ithollL . :..,: 1,.;.:.-. .'t .ir-., .';t,rl i:l : lr:: ll: ';-:::, ,:'1, deccased as lts.3,O0O/- per month. This Courl is of thc considered view that the trial Court has rightll' taken the income of the deceased and needs no interference. Therefore, the annual income of the deceased would be Rs.36,000/- (Rs.3,O00/- X 12 = Rs.36,000/-) per annum.

7 .

As per the guidelines of the Hon'ble Apex Court in dictum of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation,l if the deceased was unmarried, Yz of his income has to be deducted as there are 2 dependents i.e., 18,000/- (Rs.36,000/- X | /2: Rs.18,O00/-) towards his personal expenses. Thus, the annual income of the deceased after deducting personal expenses would come to Rs.18,00O/- per Ernnum and the Hon'ble Apex Court in the dictum of Nationo,l Insurq.nce Compang Limited. Vs, 'lzooe; e scc rzr

Pranag Sethi2, held that the future prospects of income of the employed shall also be included in determination of the compensation. Thus, considering the age of the deceased i.e., 22 years, 40%o of the income i.e., Rs.7,200/- (Rs.18,000 X 4Ook=Rs.7,2OO/-) has to be added towards future prospects and thus the amount would become Rs.25,200/- (Rs.lg,OOO + Rs.7,200 : Rs.25,200). This sum if multiplied $.ith thc ntLrlL;ltlier- 1S. as apnlic-rltlr' ',r rlti' :r.-,r, .rl-ilr,. .1,.,.r.rt..,. ri i,,.. 2l -..",':l]t I .rr1|ld r.O]lt,:, ,,r ll.. l. r.,lt)i1,, li.rr -l::..,r i_l ,. il: iis.

4,53,600/-). Thus, appellants/ petitioners are entitled to Rs.4,53,600/ -under the head ,Loss of Dependency,. 8.

Besides, appellants are also entitled for compensation under 'conventional heads' as prescribed in the dictum of National Insuro,nce Compang Limited. Vs. pranag Se6hi, i.e., Rs.15,0OO/- towards loss of Estate and Rs.15,OOO/- towards funeral charges. Therefore, they are entitled to Rs.3O,OOO/_ under the 'Conventional heads,.

9.

Further, the Hontrle Supreme Court, by reiterating the comprehensive interpretation of tonsortium, given in the authority of Magma General I'I.surd,nce Compang Limited. as. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ralrl. & other*, and in the authorit5r ' 1zo rz; r o scc eso 'lzotsy ts scc t:o

between United. India Insurance Compang Limited vs. Sqtinder Kaur g-1 Sqtwinder Kq.ur and other*, fortilied 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 clrilrlren. In rhis (':ise tlcce:rsccl Iras mothtr- r rirl llLtltr r. '

L.l . t t ::

. .:l ".1t1, 1... r:'.,.:-,:'r n r/r "rrr/r / f 'Filial consortiunr'.

1O. Therefore, appellants/ petitioners are entitled for the compensation in the following terms:

Rs. 4,53,600/- I Loss of dependency Rs. 3O,O00/- Conventional heads Rs. 80,o00/- Filial Consortium 3,600l - Rs. 5,6 TOTAL M.A.C.M.A.No.24al of 2OLS 1 1 . In the result, this appeal is allowed by enh.rncing the compensation from Rs.3,24,O00/- to Rs.5,63,600/- (Rupees Five lakhs Sixty Three thousand Six hundred only) with interest o lzozoy s scc elr

/ at the rate of 7.sYo per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of realization. Respondents No.l and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation, respondent No.2/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire amount within a period of one month from the date of this Judgment. On such deposit, parents of the deceased are permitterl to withclraw the er.rtirt, arnount alotrg r,,,i1l.t irtlr'lr,-..1 it('.-r-rr(.(l on it errrr;rll.. p,., ril,ti.r. r,:rl:,i;,,1l..r,trt r.,-. ais, ,i:t.r tr tl 1() ilii., ilr'iit.il ,.rii; , ;i u trti Lirr .ttiriitiLtc(i amount. There shall be no order as to costs.

M.A.C.M.A.No.915 of 2013 In view of the frndings in M.A.C.M.A.No.24g 1 of 2015 the M.A.C.M.A.No.915 of 2013 is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed sd/- A.v.s.

ASSISTANT RE PRASAD, ISTRAR //TRUE COPY/'

SECTION FICER To The Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal --cum' District Judge' 1.

Ail'3SiJ E[l L"T8;lN KRT.HNA' Advocate toPucl 2.

One CC to SRI' S' SURENDER REDDY' Advocate IOPUCI .) One CC to Sri LAKKADI DAYAKAR REDDY' Advocate (OPUC) 4.

5. Two CD CoPies kul \(

HIGH COURT PSSJ DATED:2911212023 gE S lz17-s C) q ( J3 18 JIJN 2O2I + DECREE .a ,'

'{ ,t - *.t'

- a\\ ,/ -:l- -.' - ,.-'

\'.i _.;r;. - COMtMON JUDGI/ENT M.A.C.M.A. Nos. : 915 OF 2013 and 2481 of 2015 ALLOWING THE MACIVIA NO. 2481 OF 2015 AND DISMISSING THE MACMA NO 915 OF 2013 WITHOUT COSTS + ce?(ca #',

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA M.A.C.M.A. Nos. : 915 OF 2013 and 2481 of 2015 Between:

Bajal Allianz General lnsurance Company Ltd, Rep. by its Branch lt/anager, Branch Office, Rkr Hyderabad.

AND

1. Perumbudoori Sudershan S/o P.Doddaiah, occ Police Constable R/o H. NO.4-9-79, Rickshaw Colony, Adilabad

2. P.Yrjaya, Wo Perummbudoori Sudershan, occ Household R/o H-No.4-9-29, Rickshaw Colony, Adilabad.

3. tVlarshiti Venkati, S/o Ramulu Occ. Owner of Tractor and Trailor No. . AP 01 V 2808 and AP. 01 V 2884, R/o Lakeruuada Village, Mandal Jainaih Adilabad District.

...RESPONDENTS/ Petitioner & R 1 Appeal Under Section 173 of M.V.Act aggrieved by the decree and judgment dated 14-1 1-2012 in tt/VOP No. 61 1 of 2008 on the file of the Court of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal -cum- District Judge, Adilabad DECREE : This Appeal coming on for hearing, upon perusing the grounds of Appeal, the Judgments and Decree of the Lower Appellant Court and the Court of the First instance and the material papers in the suit and upon hearing the arguments of Sri N. MOHAN KRISHNA , Advocate for the Appellant and Sri S. SURENDER REDDY, Advocate for the Respondent No.1 & 2 and Sri LAKKADI DAYAKAR REDDY, Advocate for Respondent No.3.

M.A.C.M.A. NO: 2481 OF 2015 Between:

1. Perumbudoori Sudershan S/o Doddaiah, Occ Police Constable, Resident of H.no. 4-9-79, Rikshaw Colony, Adilabad, Adilabad District

2. P.Vijaya, W/o Perumbudoori Sudershan Occ Household Resident of H.no. 49-79, Rikshaw Colony, Adilabad, Adilabad District ...APPELLANTS/ PETITIONER AND

1. IVarshiti Venkati , S/o Ranrulu Occ Owner oI Tractor anci Trailor lrlo APO1 V 2B0B and APOlV 2884, R/o Lalie ivada Viilage, Jainatlr l,,i,rrrrjai, Adilabad Dist 2 i,,l,s iia;:r1 ,,i ,.r;r,: (j.;rc;-., i;ts.,ii.i -.- i.-.:r , I\,4anager, branch Office, llydcrrtb:rd ...RESPONDENTS Appeal Under Section 173 of M.V.Act aggrieved by the decree and judgment daled 14-11-2O'12 in tr/VOP No. 6 1 1 of 2008 on the file of the Court of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal -cum- District Judge, Adilabad DECREE : This Appeal coming on for heanng, upon perusing the grounds of Appeal, the Judgments and Decree of the Lower Appellant Court and the Court of the First instance and the material papers in the suit and upon hearing the arguments of Sri S. SURENDER REDDY , Advocate for the Appellant and Sri LAKKADI DAYAKAR REDDY, Advocate for the Respondent No.1 and SRI N. TVOHAN KRISHNA, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2 This Court doth order and decree as follows

1. That the MACIVA No. 2481 of 2015 be and hereby is allowed and dismissing the MACMA No.91 5 of2013.

2. That the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal be and hereby is enhanced from Rs. 3,24,O0Ol- to 5, 63,600i- ( Rupees Five takhs Sixty Three thousand Six hundred only ) with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of realization.

3. That the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation, respondent No. 2 / lnsurance Company be and hereby is directed to deposit the entire amount within a period of one month from the date of this Judgment.

,,{

4. That on such deposit, parents of the deceased are permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on it equally.

5. That Petitioners/ appellants are also directed to pay deficit court fee on the enhanced amount.

6. That there shall be no order as to costs in these appeals . Sd/. A.V.S.PRASAD, ASST. REiISTRAR ,V sEcTroN o{FrcER To //TRUE COPY'

1. The Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal -cum- District Judge, Ad ilabad

2. Two C.D.Copies tiul \1.,,

HIGH COURT PSSJ DATED:2911212023 COMIVION DECREE M.A.C.M.A. Nos.:91 5 OF 2013 and 2481 of 2015 ALLOWING THE MACMA NO. 2481 OF 2015 AND DISMISSING THE MACI\,'IA NO 915 OF 2013 WITHOUT COSTS \^caP(a') Yr g-J{"v