Nadimpally Shobha v. Nadimpally Parthasarathi
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: RENUKA YARA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2025-07-23. Nadimpally Shobha v. Nadimpally Parthasarathi. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
134421 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE NAIENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 27al OF 2018 Appeal Under Section 173 ol Motor Vehicles Act aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree in O. P. No. 799 of 2012 dated 31-03-2018 on the file of the Court of the Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-l Additional District Judge, Nalgonda (FAC: lll Additional District Judge, Nalgonda). Between: 1. Nadimpally Shobha, Wo. Mallaiah, Age- 30 years, Occ- House hold, 2. Nadimpally Shravan Kumar, S/o. Mallaiah, Age- 25 years, Occ- Student, 3. Nadimpally Jaya Sudha, D/o. Mallaiah, Age-24 years All are R/o. Narketpally Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District. ... Ap pel la nts/Petiti o n e rs i AND l 1. Nadimpally Parthasarathi, Wo. Mallaiah, Age- 32 years, R/o. Narketpally i Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District I i I 2.
BajajAllianz General lnsurance Company Ltd. ,, 608 and 609, 2nd Block, I White House, Begumpet, Hyderabad- 500G16, I I Rep. by its Branch Manager. (Policy No. MC101644226Valid from 19-05- I I 2011 to 18-05-2012) I ! i i ... Respondenb 1 : l Counsel for the Appellanb: Smt. ANNAPURNA SREERAM Counsel for the Respondent No. 2: SRI SRINIVASA RAO VUTLA The Court made the following: JUDGMENT A THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE RTNUXA YENE. M. A. C. M. A. No. 2741 of 2b18 JIIIX}MENT: Heard Smt. Annapurna Sreeram, learned counsel for the appellints/claimants and Sri Srinivasa Rao Vutla, learned standing counsel for respondent No. 2/Insurance Company. Penised the entire record. 2. This is an appeal preferred by the appellants/claimants aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Chairman, Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal-cum-lll Additional District Judge at Nalgonda (for short 'the TribunalJ in O. P. No. 799 of 2012. dated 31. O3. 20i8, wherein, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.
2,74,O00/- as against the claimed amount of Rs. 6,OO,O0O/-on account of death of one Nadimpally AnCalu in a road traffic accident. 3. On 25. 04. 2012, the deceased was returning home on a motor cycle bearing No. AP-24-AM-6O68 belonging to respondent No. l, who is non else than her son, as pillion rider and it was being driven by one Ch. Venkatapathy, and -when they entered into Narketpally village, the rider of the motor cycle drove in a rash and negligent manner and high speed, due to which, the deceased fell from the motorcycle. As a result, the deceased sustained injuries and she was shifted to KtrMS, Narketpally, for treatment and from there, she was shifted to Osmania General Hospital, Hyderabad where she succumbed to injuries on 26. O4. 2OL2 while undergoing treatment. consequently, the claimant Nos. 1 and 3 are daughters and claimant No. 2 is son of the deceased have filed claim petition seeking compensation jointly and severally from the respondent No' l-owner of crime tl.
e crime vehicle. vehicle, respondent No. 2-insurer of 4. The claimant No. l got herself examined as P! v1 and an eye witness was examined as PW2 and exhibited Exs. Al to A6. In response, on behalf of respondents, RWl was examined and exhibited Ex. Bl to 83. 5. On the basis of evidence adduced by both the parties, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 2,74,OOO/- with interest at 7. 5oh per annum and the same is subject matter of the present apPeal. 6. In grounds of appeal, the claimants contended that the income of the deceased ought to have taken at Rs. 8,O00/- per month whereas tribunal has taken an amount of Rs,3,000/-per month. The tribunal has not considered the salary certificate, Ex. A6 filed to prove the income of the deceased as sweeper in Raasi Factory. Further, the tribunal has not awarded future , C. ,^. i(\ prospects and consortium. Lastly, the counsel sought increase in the percentage of interest to be awarded on the compensation awarded. 7.
During arguments in appeal, the tearned counsel for the claimants contended that the Tribunal has not considered the income of the deceased as a sweeper and as well as housewife and thereby taken the income of the deceased meagerly at Rs. 3,OO0/- per month and also referred a judgment of the Honble Supreme Court of tndia in Shaikh Sadlk Shcdk Rafique Vs. Relldnce @nero;l Insurdnce comgtang Llmfited o;nd C),tlwrs'wherein it was held as follows: Ramacltandrappa Vs. Manager, Rogal Sundaram Alliane, 2-11 13 SCC 236 determined an income of Rs. 4,SOO/-per month in the gear 2OO4 a coolie. A Constitttion Bench in for National Insurance Compang Limited us. Pranay Sethi and Others, 2017 16 SCC 68O found that there would be an increm. ental increase in the income uhich according to us utould be reasonable if at Rs-SOO/-per month frxed for euery sueressful gear. 8. Further, learned counsel for appellants sought for compensation towards future prospects and consortium.
In response, learned counsel for the Insurance Company contended that the tribunal considered an income of Rs. 3,OOO/- \ l2O2S LawSuit (SC) 707 -Ti I i i; 4 (-i per month and since no one was exarnined to prove the contents . : of Ex. A6 salary certificate, the tribunal did not consider the t' income of the deceased at Rs. 5,8721-. Responding to the i judgment ;: in Shaik Sadik's case (1 Supra), it is argued that even t. , for a non earning victim, the claimants are relied upon he said ':" judgment. i li i; ,I 9. No other point is pointed is pressed by both the Counsels. 1' il 1 i 10. Having regard to the rival contentions, since no one is examined to prove the Ex. A6, the same cannot be taken into consideration. Further, the police record clearly establishes that the deceased was a sweeper. Therefore, Rs. 3,OOO/- is taken as notional income for half of the year i. e. , the total notional income is taken at Rs. 6,0OO/- per month.
Coming to the compensation under the head of loss of dependency to which the claimants are entitled, as per National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and Others2, l}%o future prospects has to be added as the deceased was self-employed. Thus, the net monthly income comes to Rs. 6,6OO/- (Rs. 6,O0O/- + Rs. 6OO/-). Considering the net annual income at Rs. 79,2OOl- (Rs. 6,600 x l2l, if 1/3rd of the said income is deducted towards personal expenses, the annual contribution of the deceased to 16 scc 6uo '2otz rs If the said amount be Rs'52'8OO/-' the claimants would multipliedbytheappropriatemultiplier. ll,aSwasrightlytaken Vs' Delhi Scrlc Vanna on Smt' by the Tribunal relying under the the total compensation Cotpordtlons' Tvansport In ,loss would be Rs'5'8O'8OO/-' dependency' head of of an amount of are entitled to addition, the appellants/claimants Rs.
25,0O0/-towardsfuneralexpensesandRs'4O'OO0/-towards In addition thereof' loss of consortium' loss of estate and children of the deceased are to 3 who are claimant Nos. 1 \ of 'Parental under the head each Rs. 44,ooo/-entitled to consortium'. payable would be 11. Thus, in all, the total compensation 'i. by t'he as awarded instead of Rs'2'74'OOOI- Rs. 7,77,8OO/- Tribunal compensation is allowed' The M'A'C'M'A' 12. Accordingly, from the Tribunal is hereby enhanced amount awarded by interest at which shall carry to Rs'7'77'8OOl-' Rs. 2,74,OOO/- 9o/op. a;ontheenhancedcompensationfromthedateofpetition pay claimants shall the However' the tilI the date of realization' The comPensation' Fee on the enhanced defrcit Court among the aPPortioned amount shall be comPensation zooslo; scc 121 ril ii ll. ! t i ) (T, claimants in the same proportion in which original 1 compensation amounts were directed by the Tribunal. : Respondent Nos. l and 2 shall deposit the said amount within .
two rnonths from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. on such deposit, claimants are permitted to withdraw the entire amount. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this appeal, shall stand closed. SD'. il'I. NAGAMANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/' SECTION OFFICER To, District Judge, 1. The Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-l Additional Nalgonda (FAC: lll Additional District Judge, Nalgonda) (With records, if any) 2. One CC to Smt. Annapurna Sreeram, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri Srinivasa Rao Vutla, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Nadimpally Parthasarathi, Wo. Malliah, R/o. Narketpally Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District 5. Two CD Copies h- ABK/PSL l\ DATED: 23l0ll2025 , I ? I i i i t I I i I S \ I I JUDGMENT . ilLl () 1'l ut[ MACMA. No. 2741 ot 2018 * . k . S I i I I I I t i I ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS i t i i fut ll tD I ! I t i!
I :, l34/;2l IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL M EOUS APPEAL NO: 2741 OF 2018 Between: 1. Nadimpally Shobha, Wo: Matlaiah, Age- 30 years, Occ- House hold, 2. Nadimpally Shravan Kumar, S/o. Mallaiah, Age- 25 years, Occ- Student, 3. Nadimpally Jaya Sudha, D/o. Mallaiah, Age- 24 years All are R/o. Narketpally Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District. ... Appel lants/Petitioners AND 1, Nadimpally Parthasarathi, Wo. Mallaiah, Age- 32 years, R/o. Narketpally Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District. 2 BajajAtlianz General Insurance Company Ltd. ,, 608 and 609, 2nd Block, White House; Begumpet, Hyderabad- 500G16, Rep. by its Branch Manager. (Policy No. MC101644226 Valid from 19-05- 2011to 18-05-2012) .. Respondents Appeal Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree in O. P. No.
799 of 2012 daled 31-03-2018 on the file of the Court of the Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-l Additional District Judge, Nalgonda (FAC: lll Additional District Judge, Nalgonda). ORDER: This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Tribunal and the material papers in the MVOP and upon hearing the arguments of Smt. Annapurna Sreeram, Advocate for the Appellants and of Sri Srinivasa Rao Vutla, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2 and none appeared forthe Respondent Nos. 1 ! ' This Court both Order and Decree as foltows: 1. That the Motor Accident civir Miscellaneous Appeal be and hereby is Allowed; 2' That the amount awarded _Compensation by the Tribunal is hereby enhanced from Rs. 2,T4,00ot- to Rs. T,zl,gool- which irrail carry interest at siv" fer annum on the enhanced compensation from the date of petition ti. llthe date of realization; 3.
That, the claimants shail pay the deficit court Fee on the enhanced compensation. 4' That the compensation amount shall be apportioned among fl. re claimants in the same proportion in which original compensation amounts were directed by the Tribunal; 5. That the Respondent Nos. 1 and Zshall deposit the said amount within two months from the date of receip[ of a copy oi tnis Judgment; 6' That on such deposit, ctaimants are permifted to withdraw the entire amount; 7. That save as aforesaid, the decree of the Tribunal shall stands confirmed in all other respects; and 8. That there shail be no order as to costs in this appear. SD/. M. NAGAMANI ASSISTANT REGTSTRAR /ffRUE COPY// OFFICER To, 1 The Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-l Additional District (FAC: ilr Additionar District Judge, *dg9,_NSlgonda Nargonoa). 2 Two CD Copies M ABK/PSL r' / DATED: 23107/,2025 DECREE MACMA. No. 2741of 2018 ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS u LD I i t I
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.