APHC010429922018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3527] MONDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1503/2018 Between: 1. PIDUGU LAKSHMI DEVI AND 3 OTHERS, W/O. LATE P. VENUGOPAL REDDY @ VENUGOPAL, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCC- HOUSE WIFE. ,KADAPA 2. PIDUGU MANOJ KUMAR REDDY,, S/O. LATE P. VENUGOPAL REDDY @ VENUGOPAL, AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS, MINOR. 3. PIDUGU SASI KALA,, D/O. P. VENUGOPAL REDDY @ VENUGOPAL, AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS, OCC- STUDENT. 4. PIDUGU VENKATA SUBBAMMA,, W/O. LATE SIDDA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC- HOUSE WIFE. (ALL ARE R/O. D. NO. 2/24, SAI NAGAR, UPPARAPALLI VILLAGE, MADHAVARAM, SIDHOUT MANDAL, KADAPA DISTRICT). ...APPELLANT(S) AND 1. M SAINADHA REDDY AND 2 OTHERS, S/O. M. SAIBABA REDDY, OWNER OF THE SCORPIO VEHICLE BEARING NO. AP04-AP 3999, R/O. D.NO.10/18-1, MAHABOOB NAGAR, H/O. PEDDAPALLI, SIDHOUT MANDAL, KADAPA DISTRICT. 2. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, REP.BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE AT 8/1022, ABOVE SRI DURGA AUTO MOTIVE, ALMASPET, KADAPA, 2 BKM, J and AHHS, J MACMA Nos.1503 and 1849 of 2018 KADAPA DISTRICT. 3. C VENKATA SUBBAIAH, S/O. MUNAIAH, DRIVER OF SCORPIO VEHICLE BEARING NO. AP 04-AP 3999, R/ O. NIRMALAGIRI COLONY, H/O. PEDDAPALLI, SIDHOUT MANDAL, KADAPA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Appeal filed under Order 41 of CPC praying thet the Highcourt may be pleased toto present this MACMA against the Judgment and Decree passed in MVOP 14 of 2016, Dt. 29.01.2018 on the file of the Court of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District, Counsel for the Appellant(S): 1. D KODANDARAMI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GUDI SRINIVASU 2. The Court made the following: 3 BKM, J and AHHS, J MACMA Nos.1503 and 1849 of 2018 APHC010345032018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3527] MONDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1849/2018 Between: 1. ROYAL SUNDARAM, 8/1022 ABOVE SRI DURGA AUTOMOTIVE ALMASPET KADAPA ...APPELLANT AND 1. P LAKSHMI DEVI, D.NO.2/24 SAI NAGAR UPPARAPALLI VILLAGE SIDHOUT MANDAL KADAPA 2. PIDUGU MANOJ KUMAR REDDY, D.NO.2/24 SAI NAGAR UPPARAPALLI VILLAGE SIDHOUT MANDAL KADAPA 3. PIDUGU SASI KALA, D.NO.2/24 SAI NAGAR UPPARAPALLI VILLAGE SIDHOUT MANDAL KADAPA 4. PIDUGU VENKATA SUBAMMA, D.NO.2/24 SAI NAGAR UPPARAPALLI VILLAGE SIDHOUT MANDAL KADAPA 5. M SAINADHA REDDY, D.NO.10/18-1 MAHABOOB NAGAR PEDDAPALLI SIDDOUT MANDAL SIDDHOUT MANDAL KADAPA 6. C VENKAT SUBBAIAH, NIRMALAGIRI COLONY PEDDAPALLI SIDDHOUT MANDAL KADAPA ...RESPONDENT(S): 4 BKM, J and AHHS, J MACMA Nos.1503 and 1849 of 2018 Appeal filed under Order 41 of CPC praying thet the Highcourt may be pleased toto submit this memorandum of appeal against the order and decree dated 29-1-2018 passed MVOP No. 14 of 2016 on the file of the chairman motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Cum Principal IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 the operation of order and decree dated 29-01-2018 passed in MVOP No.14 of 2016 on the file of the chairman motor Accidents claims tribunal cum Principal Dist. Judge Kadapa Counsel for the Appellant: 1. GUDI SRINIVASU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. D KODANDARAMI REDDY The Court made the following: 5 BKM, J and AHHS, J MACMA Nos.1503 and 1849 of 2018 COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Krishna Mohan) Both these appeals arise out of the order dated 29.01.2018 passed in M.V.O.P. No.14 of 2016 on the file of the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal – cum – Principal District Judge, Kadapa, wherein compensation of Rs.20,35,000/- was awarded with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of realization. 2. The parties in these appeals shall be referred to by their names as mentioned before the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT). 3. The claimants were examined as P.Ws.1 to 3 and Exs.A.1 to A.15 were marked. On behalf of the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company, R.Ws.1 to 3 were examined, and Exs.B.1 to B.4 were marked. Additionally, Exs.X.1 to X.3 were also marked. 4. The learned counsel for the claimants submits that the Tribunal erred in assessing the income of the deceased for the purpose of computing compensation. It is also submitted that the Tribunal failed to consider the future prospects. Furthermore, it is contended that the rate of interest awarded is on the lower side. 5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company submits that the deceased fell from a 6 BKM, J and AHHS, J MACMA Nos.1503 and 1849 of 2018 motorcycle, and as such, the claim ought to have been made against the concerned insurer of the motorcycle. Instead, the claim was filed against the Scorpio vehicle bearing registration No. AP 04 AP 3999. He further contends that the income of the deceased was assessed at a higher rate without any proper evidence or supporting documents. 6. The brief facts of the case are as follows: On 01.07.2015, at around noon, the deceased, Pidugu Venu Gopal Reddy @ Venugopal, went to Chamundeswarapet to meet one Rosi Reddy. After completing his work, the deceased was waiting for an auto at Chamundeswarapet village on the Kadapa–Rajampet main road to return to his village. At about 2:30 p.m., the 1st respondent’s vehicle, a Scorpio bearing registration No. AP 04 AP 3999, being driven by its driver, the 3rd respondent, came from the direction of I-Madhavaram in a rash and negligent manner, at high speed, and without blowing horn dashed against the deceased, who was standing on the left side of the road. As a result, the deceased fell on the ground and sustained bleeding injuries all over his body. He was immediately shifted to RIMS Hospital, Kadapa, in a 108 ambulance for treatment, and was later referred to SVIMS Hospital, Tirupati, for better medical care. Despite treatment, the deceased succumbed to the injuries on 04.07.2015 at 10:30 p.m. while undergoing treatment at SVIMS Hospital. The 1st respondent is the owner of the Scorpio vehicle bearing 7 BKM, J and AHHS, J MACMA Nos.1503 and 1849 of 2018 registration No. AP 04 AP 3999; the 2nd respondent is the insurer of the said vehicle; and the 3rd respondent is its driver. 7. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company, relying on Exs.X.1 to X.3, submits that the accident occurred due to the deceased falling from a motorcycle, and not in the manner claimed by the claimants. He further submits that the evidence adduced by the Insurance Company does not support the version of the accident as narrated by the claimants. 8. The Tribunal, however, rightly considered the issue of liability, and based on the material on record, came to the conclusion that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the Scorpio vehicle, which was insured with the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company. 9. For the purpose of awarding compensation, the Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/-, fixing the annual income at Rs.1,20,000/-. Though P.W.1, wife of the deceased, stated that her husband was working as an interior decorator in CPF International Company, Kuwait, and earning 250 Kuwaiti Dinars per month (equivalent to Rs.52,000/-), the Tribunal did not accept this in the absence of cogent proof. However, Exs.A.11 to A.14 support the claim that the deceased worked in Kuwait. This Court finds no infirmity in the Tribunal fixing the annual income of the deceased at Rs.1,20,000/-. 8 BKM, J and AHHS, J MACMA Nos.1503 and 1849 of 2018 10. The age of the deceased was 21 years at the time of accident. The Tribunal applied a multiplier of 16 and assessed the total income as Rs.19,20,000/-. After deducting one-fourth for personal expenses, Rs.14,40,000/- was awarded as loss of dependency. 11. This Court, however, is of the view that the future prospects ought to have been considered. By adding 40% to the annual income of Rs.1,20,000/-, the revised annual income becomes Rs.1,68,000/-. Applying the same multiplier of 16, the total comes to Rs.26,88,000/-. After deducting one-fourth towards personal expenses, the loss of dependency is fixed at Rs.20,16,000/- in the place of Rs.14,40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 12. The Tribunal awarded Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses, which remains undisturbed. 13. As regards loss of consortium, the Tribunal awarded Rs.40,000/-, which is enhanced to Rs.1,60,000/- in total, as there are four dependents. 14. The award of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate is also upheld. 15. Since the loss of consortium has now been awarded appropriately, the amount of Rs.4,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under the head of "love and affection" is deleted. 16. Accordingly, we have modified the order of the Tribunal under different heads as under for the entitlement of the claimants: 9 BKM, J and AHHS, J MACMA Nos.1503 and 1849 of 2018 Loss of dependency Rs.20,16,000/- Loss of consortium Rs.1,60,000/- Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/- Loss of estate Rs.15,000/- In total Rs.22,06,000/- 17. Since the Tribunal awarded a lower rate of interest, the same is hereby increased to 7.5% per annum, from the date of petition till the date of realization. 18. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company shall deposit the entire awarded compensation amount, as determined in these appeals, within a period of six (6) weeks from today. 19. The compensation determined in these appeals shall be apportioned among the claimants in accordance with the proportionate shares fixed by the learned Tribunal. 20. The claimants are entitled to withdraw the total awarded amount in accordance with the terms fixed by the Tribunal. 21. Insofar as the minors are concerned, their shares shall be deposited in fixed deposit accounts, as directed by the Tribunal, and they shall be entitled to withdraw the same upon attaining majority. 10 BKM, J and AHHS, J MACMA Nos.1503 and 1849 of 2018 22. Accordingly, MACMA No.1503 of 2018, filed by the claimants, is allowed, and MACMA No.1849 of 2018, filed by the 2nd respondent– Insurance Company, is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ B.KRISHNA MOHAN, J ____________________________ A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA, J 30th June, 2025 cbn 11 BKM, J and AHHS, J MACMA Nos.1503 and 1849 of 2018 271 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA MACMA Nos.1503 and 1849 of 2018 (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice B. Krishna Mohan) 30th June, 2025 cbn