APHC010147802006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.1144 of 2006 Between: 1. Shaik Jamal Sahib, S/o.Bade Saheb, aged about 48 years. Coolie, R/o.Bacha Puram Village, Allagadda Mandal, Kurnool District. 2. Shaik Basher Bee, W/o.Shaik Jamal Saheb, aged about 44 years. Household, R/o.Bacha Puram Village, Allagadda Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Appellants/Petitioners AND St 1. A M Murugesan, S/o.M.R.Muthusamy Gounder, R/o.No.83, 1 Road, Cross, Kalasipalyam, New Exten., Bangalore. Main 2. The United India Insurance Company Ltd, rep by its Divisional Manager Kurnool. ...Respondents/ Respondents Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, against the order and decree dated 02.03.2006 made in M.V.O.P.No.610 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-l Additional District Court, Kurnool, Kurnool District. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of Petition, the Order and Decree of the Trial Court and the material papers in the Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri K Rathanga Pani Reddy, Advocate for the Appellants, None Appeared for Respondent No.1 and Smt A Jayanthi, Advocate for Respondent No.2. This Court doth Order and decree as follows; 1. That the MAGMA be and is hereby allowed; 2. That the amount be and is hereby raised from Rs. 1,92,000 to Rs.3,49,600/- with proportionate costs. 3. The appellants / claimants be and is hereby directed to pay the Court fee on the amount of Rs.1,49,600/- within a month. Sd/- K SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT REGISTRY //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-l Additional District Court, Kurnool, Kurnool District. 2. Two CD Copies TK VNA ■t HIGH COURT DATED:10/07/2025 DECREE MACMA No. 1144 of 2006 ALLOWING THE MACMA APHC010147802006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI Q: THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY |o TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE ^ PRESENT HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI jVipTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.1144 of 2006 Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, against the order and decree dated 02.03.2006 made in M.V.O.P.No.610 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-l Additional District Court, Kurnool, Kurnool District. Between: 1. Shaik Jamal Sahib, S/o.Bade Saheb, aged about 48 years. Coolie, R/o.Bacha Puram Village, Allagadda Mandal, Kurnool District. 2. Shaik Basher Bee, W/o.Shaik Jamal Saheb, aged about 44 years. Household, R/o.Bacha Puram Village, Allagadda Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Appellants/Petitioners AND 1. A M Murugesan, S/o.M.R.Muthusamy Gounder, R/o.No.83, 1 Road, 1®* Cross, Kalasipalyam, New Exten., Bangalore. 2. The United India Insurance Company Ltd, rep by its Divisional Manager, Kurnool. St Main ...Respondents/ Respondents ^ Counsel for the Petitioners : Sri K Rathanga Pani Reddy Counsel for Respondent No.1: None Appeared Counsel lor Respondent No.2: Smt A Jayanthi The Court made the following order: APHC010147802006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) m [3311] I 0 lTi-Tih Thursday, the Tenth Day of July Two Thousand and Twenty Five Present The Honourable Ms.Justice B.S.Bhanumathi Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal NO: 1144 of 2006 Between: Shaik Jamal Sahib & 2 others ...Appellants and A.M.Murugesan and others Counsel for the appellants: I.K.Rathanga Pani Reddy Counsel for the respondents: 1.Nil 2.A.Jayanthi The Court made the following: ...Respondens 2 BSB, J M.A.C.M.A.No.1144 of 2006 Judgment: This appeal was filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award dated 02.03.2006 in M.V.O.P.No.610 of 2004 on the file of Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal -cum- I Additional District Court, Kurnool, granting compensation of Rs.1,92,000/-, as against claim of Rs.2,50,000/- for the death of Shaik Jamal Vali (in short ‘the deceased’) who is the son of the claimants in a motor vehicle accident. 1. The deceased, the cleaner of lorry bearing No. AP 21 U 8789, met with an accident on 30.05.2004, while repairing the said lorry which was hit by another lorry bearing No.KA 01 AA 2002 driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner. The claimants contended that the deceased used to earn Rs.2,000/- pm. and that they are dependents on him. The 1®* respondent who is the owner of the offending vehicle remained ex-parte. The 2"'^ respondent who is the insurer of the offending vehicle contested the claim by filing a counter. On behalf of the claimants, the 1®‘ claimant was examined as P.W.1 and O.Yella Reddy, was examined as P.W.2 and Exs.AI to A6 (Ex.A.1, CC of First Information Report in Cr.No.120 of 2004, under Section 304 (A) I.P.C., dated 31.05.2004 of Dhone Police Station, Ex.A.2, C.C of Inquest report of the deceased Shaik Jamal Vali, dated 31.05.2004, Ex.A.3, C.C of the post mortem report of the deceased Shaik Jamal Vali, dated 31.05.2004, Ex.A.4, C.C of the M.V Inspectors report dated 31.05.2004, Ex.A.5, C.C of charge sheet in C.C.No.198 of 2004 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Dhone, Ex.A.6, Certificated issued by the employer of the deceased, dated 28.06.2005) were marked. On behalf of the 2'^'^ respondent, no witness was examined, but the copy of policy of insurance was marked as Ex.B.2 and a portion of Ex.A.1 was marked as Ex.B.1. 2. 3. The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.1,500/- pm, ignoring the salary certificate dated 28.06.2005, marked as Ex.A.6 allegedly issued by employer of the deceased. By taking 42 years which is the age of 3 BSB, J M.A.C.M.A.No,1144 of 2006 ¥ the mother as relevant factor, the Tribunal adopted multiplier 15 and calculated the total amount of loss of contribution to the family at Rs. 1,80,000/-, after deducting 1/3'’'^ of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses. In addition to that, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.2,000/- for funeral expenses and Rs. 10,000/- for loss of estate. Thus, in total, an amount of Rs.1,92,000/- was awarded as compensation with interest at the rate of 7.5 % p.a. and costs. Both the respondents were made jointly and severally liable to pay compensation. Aggrieved by the award for granting compensation less than the amount sought, the claimants preferred this appeal. The notice sent to the 1 respondent was returned un-served though it was sent to the same address as given before the Tribunal. 4. St Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the 2"^^ respondent. 5. The learned counsel for the appellants contended that the Tribunal erroneously ignored Ex.A.6 and assessed the income of the deceased at low rate, whereas in certain cases, the Courts notionally valued the income of similarly placed cleaner at Rs.3,500/- p.m. He further submitted that the Tribunal failed to add amount towards future prospects of the deceased while calculating the amount of contribution of the deceased to the family. It is also submitted by him that the Tribunal erroneously adopted the age of the mother to choose the multiplier, whereas it is settled principle of law that the age of deceased shall be taken in to consideration. Further, he submitted that the amount of compensation granted under conventional heads for funeral expenses and loss of estate shall be Rs.15,000/- each, whereas the Tribunal awarded only Rs.2,000/- for funeral expenses and Rs.10,000/- for loss of estate. Therefore, he submitted that the quantum of compensation shall be increased. 6. BSB, J M.A.C.M.A.No.1144 of 2006 On the other hand, learned counsel representing the 2"^ respondent submitted that the Tribunal adequately compensated the claimants and there is no need to interfere with the impunged award. Insofar as the income of the deceased is concerned, since Ex.A.6 is not supported by any other credible evidence and it can be produced as a self serving evidence, the Tribunal is met with no option except to make notional assessment of the income of the deceased. During the year when the accident occurred, the income of a cleaner is not as high as now prevails. Therefore, the Tribunal rightly assessed the notional income of the deceased at Rs. 1,500/- p.m. However, since no amount towards future prospects of the deceased was added, 40 % of his income shall be added. Therefore. Rs.600/- shall be added to Rs. 1,500/- which equals to Rs.2.100/-. Out of the same, l/S''^ shall be deducted towards his personal expenses. Thus, his contribution to the family is Rs. 1,400/- p.m. and Rs. 17,200/- is his annual contribution. 7. 8. 9. As rightly contended, the age of the deceased shall be taken into consideration to choose the multiplier. Since the deceased was aged 22 years, the multiplier relevant to the age group of 21 to 25 years as per the decision of the Supreme Court in Sarava Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation\ is 18. By multiplying the amount of annual contribution by the multiplicand 18 comes to Rs.3,09,600/- (Rs. 17,200/- X 18). 10. The Tribunal awarded a low amount of Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.2.000/- towards funeral expenses. Both these amounts can be raised to Rs. 15,000/- each. Further the claimants are entitled to compensation for the loss of the parental consortium. Considering the monetary value during the year of the accident, an amount of Rs.5,000/- each is given under the said head. 11. Thus, total amount payable will be Rs.3,49,600/-. 2009 AIR sew 4992 5 BSB, J M.A.C.M.A.No.1144 of 2006 12. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed rising the amount from Rs. 1,92,000 to Rs.3,49,600/- with proportionate costs. The appellants / claimants shall pay the Court fee on the amount of Rs.1,49,600/- within a month. 13. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal shall stand closed. Sd/- K SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-l Additional District Court, Kurnool, Kurnool District, (with records if any) 2. One CC to Sri K Rathanga Pani Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One Qi:^ to §mt A Jayanthi, Advocate [OPUC] 4. The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. (to dispatch the trial court records) 5. Two CD Copies TK VNA HIGH COURT DATED:10/07/2025 JUDGMENT + DECREE X 1 § JUl 2825 ^ Current Section £rsAATC%^^V to MACMA No. 1144 of 2006 ALLOWING THE MACMA