TCDS,J MACMA_288_2019 1 APHC010112432019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3505] MONDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.288/2019 Between: 1.A.P.S.R.T.C VAKADU DEPOT, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, HYDERABAD (NOW AT VIJAYAWADA). ...APPELLANT AND 1.ANNAMETI VASUDHARA, , W/O LATE RAMU, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, FEMALE, HINDU. R/O. ANNAMEDU VILLAGE, NAYUDUPET MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT 2.ANNAMETI BHARATHAMMA, , W/O SANKARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, FEMALE, HINDU. RIO. ANNAMEDU VILLAGE, NAYUDUPET MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 3.ANNAMETI SANKARAIAH, S/O CHINNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, MALE, HINDU. R/O. ANNAMEDU VILLAGE, NAYUDUPET MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 4.ANNAMETI BHAVANA, D/O LATE RAMU, AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS, FEMALE, HINDU. R/O. ANNAMEDU VILLAGE, TCDS,J MACMA_288_2019 2 NAYUDUPET MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 5.ANNAMETI SAI RUSHI, S/O LATE RAMU, AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS, MALE, HINDU. R/O. ANNAMEDU VILLAGE, NAYUDUPET MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DIST., 4 AND 5 MINORS REP. BY THEIR MOTHER A. VASUNDHARA. ...RESPONDENT(S): Appeal filed under Order 41 of CPC praying thet the Highcourt may be pleased topleased to allow the MACMA by setting aside the Order and Decree dated 09-08-2018 passed in M.V.O.P.No.522 of 2014 on the file of the Court of the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-VII Additional District Judge, Gudur, SPSR Nellore District and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 To condone the delay of 20 days is filing the appeal against the order and Decree dated 09-08- 2018 passed in M.V.O.P. No.522/2014 on the file of the court of the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal - Cum - VII Addl. District Judge,Gudur, SPSR Nellore Dist. IA NO: 2 OF 2019 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 To stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the order and Decree dated 09-08-2018 passed in M.V.O.P. No.522/2014 on the file of the court of the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal - Cum - VII Addl. District Judge,Gudur, SPSR Nellore Dist., including the execution proceedings,pending disposal of the above MACMA. Counsel for the Appellant: TCDS,J MACMA_288_2019 3 1.P DURGA PRASAD SC FOR APSRTC Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.SIVA PRASAD KATAKAMSETTY The Court made the following: TCDS,J MACMA_288_2019 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR MACMA No.288 of 2019 JUDGMENT:- 1. The present appeal is filed by aggrieved by order dt.09.08.2018 in MVOP No.522 of 2014, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-VII Additional District Judge, Gudur, SPSR Nellore District by APSRTC. 2. Heard counsel for the appellant and counsel appearing for the respondents. 3. Perused the material available on record. 4. The counsel for the appellant would strenuously contend that the Tribunal had erred in awarding compensation of Rs.11,45,200/- together with interest @ 6% inasmuch as the claim made by the petitioners was to Rs.10,22,000/-. He would further submit that while awarding the said compensation, the Tribunal ignored the fact that, the claimants have not filed any documentary evidence, so as to their entitlement to receive the same. He would further TCDS,J MACMA_288_2019 5 submit that having disbelieved the documents filed by the claimants, the Tribunal ought not to have granted the compensation as awarded and contend that the order under challenge is liable to be set aside. 5. On the other hand, the counsel for the claimants would submit that the Tribunal placing reliance on Ex.A7, Encumbrance Certificate dt.27.12.2007, had awarded compensation to the claimants. He would further submit that the deceased had purchased a residential building and the same is evident on perusal of Ex.A7-Encumbrance Certificate dated 27.12.2007. 6. In order to substantiate the claim, the claimants filed various documentary evidence before the Tribunal including copy of Form-24(B) Register, which was marked Ex.A6. However, Ex.A6 does not show the name of the deceased and therefore the Tribunal rightly disbelieved the said document. 7. A perusal of order under challenge, it is clear that the Tribunal placing reliance on Ex.A7-Encumbrance TCDS,J MACMA_288_2019 6 Certificate dt.27.12.2007, awarded compensation of Rs.11,45,200/-. Ex.A7 would reveal that the deceased had purchased residential building by virtue registered sale deed dt.24.11.2006. The factum of the said purchase was not denied by the appellant. In the absence of any material available on record it can be held that, the deceased had sufficient income. Further, a perusal of Ex.A11, Chit Fund Book, it is clear that the deceased subscribed chit for Rs.5,00,000/- and he was paying Rs.10,000/- out of his earnings. Though, the chit was subscribed in the name of the wife of the deceased, it is apparent from the record that, his wife was not earning member. Therefore, an inference can be drawn that the deceased was paying the subscription on behalf of his wife. 8. Further, in order to disprove the evidence of the claimants, the appellant neither adduced any order evidence nor marked documentary evidence. In the circumstances, the contention of the counsel for the appellant cannot be countenanced and accordingly the same is rejected. Further, TCDS,J MACMA_288_2019 7 the Tribunal after following the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of “National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and others1”, had awarded just compensation. 9. Though, the counsel for the appellant contended that the Tribunal ought not to have granted compensation over and above the claim made by the claimants. In this connection, it is pertinent to note that the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of “Ramla & others Vs. National Insurance Company Limited”2 had held that the Courts are duty bound to grant just compensation and are empowered to grant more than the claim made by the claimants. Following this judgment, it cannot be said that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is arbitrary. 10. During the course of hearing, the counsel for the claimants would submit that, the Tribunal had granted interest @ 6% per annum, whereas this Court consistently granting interest @ 7.% per annum. This Court finds 1 AIR 2017 SC 5157 2 (2019) 2 SCC 192 TCDS,J MACMA_288_2019 8 sufficient force in the contention of the counsel for the claimants. Having regard to the submissions made by the counsel for the claimants, the interst component is enhanced from 6% to 7.5% per annum. Further, the appellant is directed to pay the compensation together with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization to the claimants within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. 11. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is dismissed with the above observation as indicated above. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________ JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR 06.04.2026 DR TCDS,J MACMA_288_2019 9 36 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR MACMA No.288 of 2019 Date 06.04.2026 U DR