Telangana High Court
MACMA/1779/2009 of Sanikommu Mary Vs I.Ramanjamma on 30 December 2015
B.SIVA SANKARA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No.1779 of 2009 JUDGMENT: The claimants are mother, wife and two minor children of the deceased by name, S.Konda Reddy, aged about 35 years as per Ex.A3-Post Mortem report, who maintained the claim under Section 163- A of the Motor Vehicles Act for compensation
HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAOM.A.C.M.A. No.1779 of 2009
Citations and Judicial Treatment
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…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
JUDGMENT:
The claimants are mother, wife and two minorchildren of the deceased by name, S.Konda Reddy,aged about 35 years as per Ex.A3-Post Mortem report,who maintained the claim under Section 163-A of theMotor Vehicles Act for compensation of Rs.2,50,000/-against owner and insurer of lorry bearing No.
AP 27W 4344, the tribunal having heard, held that theaccident was result of negligent driving of the driver oflorry and awarded Rs.1,67,000/- with interest at 7.5%p.a.with joint liability against owner and insurer of lorry byholding that non-impleadment of auto in which thedeceased was travelling is no way fatal to themaintainability of the claim.
2. Aggrieved by the award of the tribunal ofcompensation awarded supra in O.P.No.567 of 2007dated 04.11.2008 as utterly low, the claimantsmaintained the present appeal against owner andinsurer.
3. The 1[st] respondent remained exparte before thetribunal and in the appeal endorsed as not necessaryparty there from.
4. Heard and perused the material on record.
5. Even the claim is under Section 163-A of theMotor Vehicles Act, in the absence of proof of earnings,the minimum to be taken as per Schedule II of the Motorvehicles Act of Rs.15,000/- p.a. to be read asRs.30,000/- p.a. vide Kishan Gopal Vs Lala[[1]].Thus,the earnings of the deceased can be taken atRs.30,000/- p.a. and if 1/3[rd] is deducted towardspersonal expenses of the deceased, it comes toRs.20,000/- and loss of dependency comes atRs.20,000/-x15 (the multiplier applicable from the age ofthe deceased as per Schedule II of the Act is ‘15 )=Rs.3,00,000/-. Apart from it, the petitioners are entitledto Rs.2,500/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.2,000/-towards funeral expenses (as per Schedule II of theAct). Thus, in total it comes to Rs.3,04,500/-. Thoughthe claimants claimed Rs.2,50,000/- as compensation,as per the expression of the Apex Court in Rajesh v.Ranbir Singh[[2]],they are entitled to just compensationof Rs.3,04,500/- subject to payment of deficit Court feeunder Rule 475 of Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicle Rules.
6. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed by enhancingcompensation from Rs.1,67,000/- to Rs.3,04,500/- with interest at 7.5% from the date of claim petition tillrealization.
7. The claimants/appellants are not entitled toexecute decree without payment of deficit court fee.There is no order as to costs.
8. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shallstand closed.
Date:30-12-2015pab
_________________________
Dr. B. SIVA SANKARA RAO, J
[1]2014(1)SCC-244)[2]2013 ACJ 1403