Telangana High Court

MACMA/97/2015 of BURRI LIMBAVVA, NIZAMABAD DIST AND 3 OTHERS Vs SYED YOUSUF ALI AND ANR on 29 December 2023

Cites 0, Cited by 0

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 MOTOR ACCIDE T CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPE NO: 97 OF 2015 Appeal filed under Section '173 of MV Act against Order and Decree

ltfffE5,.,f[ [3208 ]]IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE [OF ][TELANGANA].j,iAT HYDERABAD;:;i. [r,]FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF [DECEMBER]TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREEPRESENTITHE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHAiI.:iMOTOR ACCIDET CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPENO: 97 OF 2015BIAppeal filed under Section under Section Section [['173 ]]of MV Act against Order and MV Act against Order and Act against Order and and [[Decree dated]]made in O.P.No.638 in O.P.No.638 O.P.No.638 of 2010 2010 on the [[file ]]of the the [[Chairman, ]][[Motor ]]iAccident Claims Tribunal (District Judge) at Nizamabadat NizamabadNizamabadi'*,:J1. Burri Limbawa Wo. Burri Buchaiah, Age 52 [years, ]Occ [Household]2. Burri Burri Godavari D/o. Burri Buchaiah, Age [[28 ][years, ]][[years, ]]Occ [[Nil.]])i.3. Burri Rajitha Dio. Buni Buchaiah, Age [26 ][years, Occ ][Nil.]4. Burri Burri Ganga Prasad S/o. Burri Buchaiah, Age 24 [[years, ]]Occ Nil. Nil. jIJiAll are R:/o. H.No.6-8-130, Namdevwada, Nizamabad, Nizamabad District [fi]...APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS1. Syed Yousuf Ali S/o. Mohd. Ali, Age major, Occ: Owner of Lorry bearing [No.]MH-29-7869, R/o. Azad Ward, Vasant Nagar, Purad D, Yavatmal. t2. National lnsurance Company Limited, Through its Branch Manager, PuradYavatmal, (cover note No 114957, valid from5-3-1999) Represented byBranch Manager, Jawahar Road, Nizamabad.

Appeal filed under Section under Section Section [['173 ]]of MV Act against Order and MV Act against Order and Act against Order and and [[Decree dated]]7-05-2014 made in O.P.No.638 in O.P.No.638 O.P.No.638 of 2010 2010 on the [[file ]]of the the [[Chairman, ]][[Motor ]]iAccident Claims Tribunal (District Judge) at Nizamabadat NizamabadNizamabad Between:

2. Burri Burri Godavari D/o. Burri Buchaiah, Age [[28 ][years, ]][[years, ]]Occ [[Nil.]]

4. Burri Burri Ganga Prasad S/o. Burri Buchaiah, Age 24 [[years, ]]Occ Nil. Nil.

AND

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

Counsel for the Appellants: SRl. S. SURENDER REDDY

Counsel for the Respondents: NONE APPEARED

The Court delivered the following JUDGMENT:

iflI

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHAM.A.C.M.A.No.97 of 2Ol5

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

JUDGMENT:

This appeal is filed against the Order dated 07.05.20 14 inO.P.No.638 of 2010 passed by the Chairman, Motor AccidentsClaims Tribunal (District Judge), Nizamabad.

2. The appellants/ petitioners hled O.P.No.638 of 2010,claiming compensation of Rs.8,00,00O l- for the death of thedeceased, Burri Gangadhar in the road traffic accident occurredon 17.1O.1999. The Police, Kamareddy, registered F.l.R. No.234of 1999 under Section 304-A and 337 IPC against the driver ofthe crime vehicle.

3. The Trial Court considering the oral and documentaryevidence granted Rs.6,00,000/ - with interest @ 7 .5o/o perannum lrom the date of petition to till the date of realization.

4. The learned Counsel for the appellants/ petitionerscontended that the contributory negligence of the deceased as25o/o was taken by the Trial Court but there was no pleading inthe counter regarding,and the age of the parents of the deceasedwas considered for taking the appropriate multiplier instead ofconsidering the age of the deceased. Therefore, requested thisCourt to modify the order of the Trial Court.

5. On 17.10'1999, [Burri ][Gangadhar ][/ ][deceased ][was]proceeding [on the ][motorcycle bearing No'AP ][25 ][C ][2332 ][and]Pradeep [Kumar was ][the ][pillion ][rider' ][At ][i2'00 ][noon' ][they]reached [in front ][of ][Balaj ][i ][Petrol ][Pump' ][Kamareddy ][and ][one ][lorry]bearing [No.MH ][2g-7 ][869 ][at ][high ][speed ][in ][rash and ][negligent]manner [was ][going ahead ][of ][their ][motorcycle ][and ][the ][driver ][of]the said [lorry ][applied ][sudden ][brake ][in ][the ][middle ][of ][the ][road']Asa result, [Burri ][Gangadhar ][came ][under][ the lorry ][and]and sustainedsustained [rupture ][of ][liver' ][heart ][and ][lungs]head [injury][ and ][died ][on ][the ][way ][to ][hosPital ][at]grievous KamareddY.

6. Heard [both ][sides' Perused ][the entire ][record ][']

As the the [[driver of ][the ][lorry ][applied ]][[the ][lorry ][applied ]][[lorry ][applied ]][[applied ]][[sudden ][brakes ]][[brakes ]][[and ][the]][[the]]

7. As the the [[driver of ][the ][lorry ][applied ]][[the ][lorry ][applied ]][[lorry ][applied ]][[applied ]][[sudden ][brakes ]][[brakes ]][[and ][the]][[the]]deceased [was ][going ][behind ][the ][vehicle' ][the ][deceased ][went]under [the ][lorry and ][sustained ][injuries ][and he ][died' ][Therefore']it cannot [be ][said ][that ][there was ][contributory ][negligence ][on ][the]part of the [deceased']

It was was [[stated ]][[that ][he ][was ][working ][as ][beedi commission]][[he ][was ][working ][as ][beedi commission]][[was ][working ][as ][beedi commission]][[working ][as ][beedi commission]][[as ][beedi commission]][[beedi commission]]

8. It was was [[stated ]][[that ][he ][was ][working ][as ][beedi commission]][[he ][was ][working ][as ][beedi commission]][[was ][working ][as ][beedi commission]][[working ][as ][beedi commission]][[as ][beedi commission]][[beedi commission]]and [also ][doing ][milk ][business ][and ][was ][earning]agent Rs.20,0OO/- [to ][Rs'25,000/-' but ][he ][has ][not ][filed ][any ][document']As such, [the ][trial ][Court ][taken ][his ][income ][as ][Rs'8'OOO/- ][and]

-, " -P"-tfi:_-.-,'i-J:a:tl::i'ij..#;;15*

this court needs [no reason ][to ][interfere ][with ][the ][salary ][taken ][by]the trial Court

g. As per the [guidelines ][of ][the ][Hon'bie ][Apex ][Court ][in ][dictum]of Sarla Vermq [Vs. ][Delhi ][Tvansport ][Corporatlon,r ][if ][the]deceased [was unmarri ][ed, ][Vz ][of his ][income ][has ][to ][be ][deducted]his personal [expenses. ][Thus, ][the ][annual ][income ][of the ][deceased]after deducting [personal ][expenses ][comes ][to ][Rs'48,000/- ][per]annum and [the Honble ][Apex ][Court ][in ][the dictum ][of ][Natlondl]Ins.rtrclnce Compang [Llmlted ][Vs. ][Pranag ][Sethtz, ][heid ][that ][the]future [prospects ][of ][income ][of the ][self-employed ][deceased ][shall]also be included [in ][determination ][of the ][compensation ][Thus,]considering the [age ][of ][the ][deceased, ][4O%o ][of the ][income ][has ][to]be added towards [future ][prospects ][and ][thus ][the amount would]become Rs.67,200/-. [This ][sum ][if ][muttiplied ][with ][the multiplier]to [the ][age ][of ][the ][deceased ][i.e.lS, ][it ][would ][come ][to]applicable Rs.12,09,60O/-. [Thus, the ][appellants/ ][petitioners ][are ][entitled ][to]Rs. 12,O9,60O/- under [the ][head ]['Loss ][of Dependency'']

10. Besides, the appellants [are also ][entitled for ][compensation]under 'conventional [heads' ][as ][prescribed ][in ][the ][dictum ][of]Natlonal Insurance [Compang ][Llmlted ][Vs. ][Prandg ][Sethi, ][r'e ][,]

' lzooey [6 ][scc ][tz ][t]

'1zorz; [to ][scc ][oao]

TII

Rs. 15,000/- towards loss of Estate and Rs.15,000/- towardsfuneral charges.funeral charges.

1 1 . Further, the Hon,ble Supreme Court, by reiterating thecomprehensive interpretation of [,consortium, ]given in theauthority of Magma General Insurqnce Compang Llmited as.Nrrnu Ra,m Alias Chuhru Ram & other*, and in the authorityNrrnu Ra,m Alias Chuhru Ram & other*, and in the authoritybetween tlnited Indla Insurance Comlrdng Limited vs.Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur and other#, fortified thatthe amounts for loss of consortium shall be awarded to thethe amounts for loss of consortium shall be awarded to thechildren 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 theirfor the loss of their grown-up children, to compensate theiragony, love and affection, care and companionship of deceasedchildren. Accordingly, it is just and reasonable to awardRs.4O,000/- as filial consortium to the petitioners.Rs.4O,000/- as filial consortium to the petitioners.

12. Therefore, the appellants/petitioners are entitled for thecompensation in the following terms:

o '1zo18; [ta ][scc ][t:o]lzozol e scc 6+n

13. In the result, the appeal is allowed by enhancing thecompensation amount from Rs.6,00,0O0/_ to Rs.12,Z9,600/_(Rupees Twelve Lakhs Seventy Nine Thousand Six Hundredonly) with interest at the rate of T.Sok per annum from the dateof filing the petition till date of realization. Respondent No.2shall deposit theentire amount within a period of onemonth from thedate of order. On such Deposit, thepetitioners are permitted to withdraw the entire amountwith the interest accrued on it equalllr'. Theappellants/ peti tior-rers are directed to pay the deficit courtfee on the er-rhanced amount. There shall be no order asto costs Miscellaneous .petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

Sd/. P. PASSISTANT REGISTRARll{r.ttSECTION OFFICER

//TRUE COPY//SECTION OFFICERSECTION OFFICERTo,1. The Chairman, [Motor ]Accident Claims Tribunal [(District Judge) at ][Nizamaba]2. One CC to SRl. [S. ]SURENDER REDDY, Advocate [OPUC]3. Two CD Copies1. The Chairman, [Motor ]Accident Claims Tribunal [(District Judge) at ][Nizamaba]2. One CC to SRl. [S. ]SURENDER REDDY, Advocate [OPUC]3. Two CD CopiesVrVkam.,\-9-VV

r l ..li--;.l::. [']I1:,iiil,'.tt,i,"1

HIGH COURT

DATED: 2911212023

JUDGMENT

MACMA.No.97 of 2015

ALLOWING THE MACMA

WITHOUT COSTS

i.{:E;*;'I

E..,""

+I

iir, "l'!*iii,f.;t;,i, [i-i]iJ

1. ,t.,. [.]

| #-:r,l

It-rt ,'iiail'',i*t't-q.lIo-)T,ia [:l]il,.1.)30[ililn ][?flIl]'I. i..:',..i.?:l: :-..)i?": ['ii]It,*#i,ai: [:r ][r[]t.ti{il,:i t,I:t:

.l;. i.:,.-.t-.i

.;

i:';i rl+i-'l,:JN':li1f*[i ':'l+*r,.1g$i1

E

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE [OF ]TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD

iFRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER)TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREEl,r_l*r,.i.,. [,]PRESENT'-i#iTHE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA$t$:.;MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS [APPEAL ][NO: ][97 ][OF 2015]$;! -'f:1. Burri Limbawa Wo. Burri Buchaiah, [Age ][52 ][years, Occ ][Household.]It2. Bwri Godavari D/o. Burri Buchaiah, Age 28 Bwri Godavari D/o. Burri Buchaiah, Age 28 Godavari D/o. Burri Buchaiah, Age 28 [[years, ]]Occ [[Nil.]]1:3. Burri Rajitha Dio. Burri Buchaiah, Burri Rajitha Dio. Burri Buchaiah, [[Age ][26 ][years, Occ ][Nil.]][[26 ][years, Occ ][Nil.]][[years, Occ ][Nil.]][[Nil.]]t4. Burri Burri Ganga Prasad S/o. Burri Buchaiah, Age [[24 ][years, Occ ][Nil.]][[years, Occ ][Nil.]][[Nil.]]All are Fyo. H.No.6-8-130, Namdewvada, Nizamabad, [Nizamabad ][District]!.1'iii.,.APPELLANTS/PETITIONERSSE!Yiri:1. Syed Yousuf Ali S/o. Mohd. Ali, Age [major, Occ: Owner ][of ][Lorry bearing ][No.]itMH-29-7869, Ri/o. Azad Ward, Vasant [Nagar, Purad ][D, ][Yavatmal.].'2. National lnsurance Company Limited, National lnsurance Company Limited, [[Through ][its ][Branch Manager, ][Purad,]][[its ][Branch Manager, ][Purad,]][[Branch Manager, ][Purad,]][[Purad,]]Yavatmal, (cover note No 114957, valid from 5-3-1999) Represented from 5-3-1999) Represented 5-3-1999) Represented Represented [[by ][its]][[its]]Branch Manager, Jawahar Road, Nizamabad. Nizamabad. I

Between:

2. Bwri Godavari D/o. Burri Buchaiah, Age 28 Bwri Godavari D/o. Burri Buchaiah, Age 28 Godavari D/o. Burri Buchaiah, Age 28 [[years, ]]Occ [[Nil.]]

3. Burri Rajitha Dio. Burri Buchaiah, Burri Rajitha Dio. Burri Buchaiah, [[Age ][26 ][years, Occ ][Nil.]][[26 ][years, Occ ][Nil.]][[years, Occ ][Nil.]][[Nil.]]

4. Burri Burri Ganga Prasad S/o. Burri Buchaiah, Age [[24 ][years, Occ ][Nil.]][[years, Occ ][Nil.]][[Nil.]]

AND

2. National lnsurance Company Limited, National lnsurance Company Limited, [[Through ][its ][Branch Manager, ][Purad,]][[its ][Branch Manager, ][Purad,]][[Branch Manager, ][Purad,]][[Purad,]]Yavatmal, (cover note No 114957, valid from 5-3-1999) Represented from 5-3-1999) Represented 5-3-1999) Represented Represented [[by ][its]][[its]]Branch Manager, Jawahar Road, Nizamabad. Nizamabad. Yavatmal, (cover note No 114957, valid from 5-3-1999) Represented from 5-3-1999) Represented 5-3-1999) Represented Represented [[by ][its]][[its]]Branch Manager, Jawahar Road, Nizamabad. Nizamabad.

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

Appeal filed under Section 173 of MV Act against Order [and ][Decree ][dated]7 -O5-2O14 made in O.P.No.638 of 20'10 on the [file ]of [the ][Chairman, Motol]JAccident Claims Tribunal [(Diskict ]Judge) at [Nizamabad]t Jt{I[[v"']]$:1

ORDER: This appeal coming [on for ][hearing ][and ][upon ][perusing ][the ][g][rounds ][of]appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the [Lower ]Court [and the material papers in the]case and upon hearing the arguments of Sri. [S. Surender Reeddy, Advocate for the]Appellant and none appeared [for ]Respondents [either ][in ][person ][or ][Advocate]

This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

This the Motor Accident Qivil Miscellaneous Appeal be [and hereby is allowed ][[v"']]by enhancing the compensation amount [from ]Rs. [6,00,000/- ]to [Rs.'ffi]12,7g,6OOt- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Seventy Nine Thousand Six [Hundred ]$by enhancing the compensation amount [from ]Rs. [6,00,000/- ]to [Rs.'ffi]12,7g,6OOt- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Seventy Nine Thousand Six [Hundred ]$

/

- [_ ][--1,-_i;:f]T-:iltiI.fiiII*-$ir$!.riili:..:ti${,1.:-!lill!i!r':.tif '.t'I [li]. a'' [qr]:5Cr,: aii':;,3l:l-s [i(]Ir'

only) with interest at the rate of 7.5o/o [per ]annum from the date of filing thepetition till date of realization;

2. That the Respondent No.2 shall deposit the entire amount within a [period ]ofone month from the date of order;one month from the date of order;

3. That on such deposit, the petitioners be and hereby are [permitted ]to withdraw.f.fthe entire amount with the interest accrued on it equally; i

4. That the appellants/petitioners be and hereby are directed to pay the deficitcourt fee on the enhanced amount; icourt fee on the enhanced amount; i

5. That save as aforesaid, the decree of the Lower Cou( shall stands confirmedin all other respects: andin all other respects: and

6. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal.

Sd/. P. PADMANABHA REDDYASSISTANT REGISTRAR//TRUE COPY//i REGISTRARiYtiSECTION OFFICER

To,

1. The Chairman, lvlotor Accident Claims Tribunal (District Judge) at Nizamabad 2- Two CD Copies ,$(- HIGH COURTDATED: 29fi212023

DECREE

MACMA.No.97 of 2015

ALLOWING THE MACMA

WITHOUT COSTS

6p{-r\-t-

,!itIL.' ,{,it'fli:[},:1, ['..']'tl;ii.,ljt-r.-:etiilI+-t.,Fi.iir..?i?I.E-f1!!h'';;''1fi'tlF',,'

:ltl!.;,I it_I,.:.HT;t*:ffif ['.:!].it'; ,i rq+.?st"!rf;t rt1I l [.ri ]', '.J,l.! i:l

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead