\ APHC010606142024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.290 of 2025 Between: 1. Pulleti Naga Lakshmi, W/o. Veera Venkateswara Rao, Aged 56 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o. D.No.1-321, Kattavarni Cheruvu, Gudlavalleru Mandal, Krishna District - 521325. 2. Pulleti Veera Venkateswara^ Rao, S/o. Venkata Ranga Rao, Aged 60 years, R/o. D.No. 1-321, Kattavarni Cheruvu, Gudlavalleru Mandal, Krishna District - 521325, ...Appellants/Claimants/Respondents AND 1. Pulleti Pavani, W/o. Late Ajay Babu, Aged 30 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o.D.No.1-41, China Pandraka, Kruthivennu Mandal, Krishna District- 521324. ...Respondent/Claimant 2. Sanjay Singh, S/o. Belash Singh, Aged 47 years, Occ: Driver of Bolero, R/o. Ojha Bogha Village, Panel] Post, Rothas District, Bihar-821307. 3. Sudhir Kumar Singh, S/o. Satya Deo Singh, Aged.64 years, Occ: Owner of Bolero, R/o. Manaura, Rontas, Dehrl on Sone, Bihar-821307. .. .Respondents/Appeilants i 4. M/s National Insurance Company Limited, Rep. by its Legal Manager, TP Claims Hub, Governorpet, Vijayawada, Krishna District-520002. ...Respondent/Respondent Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, aggrieved by the Order and Decree dated 09.03.2023, passed in M.V.O.P.No.138 of 2018 the file of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-Cum-VII I Additional District and Sessions Judge at Vijayawada, Krishna District. on 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 Smt Kalla Tulasi Durgamba, Advocate for the Appellants and of Sri Subrahmanyeswara Rao Loya, Advocate for Respondent No.1, none appeared for Respondent Nos.2 & 3 and Sri Manoj Kumar Bethapudi, Advocate for Respondent No.4. This Court doth Order and decree as follows: 1. That the appeal be and is hereby allowed; That the compensation amount of Rs.56,56,400/- with interest @7.5% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realisation, be and is hereby apportioned: That the appellant/petitioner No.2 in M.V.O.P.No.138 of 2018 be and is hereby entitled for Rs.22,62,560/- with interest @7.5.% p.a. and costs; '■{ -.Vi -i'. ' That the 1®‘ respondent herein/ petitioner No.1 in M.V.O.P.No.138 of 2018 be and is hereby entitled for Rs.33,93,840/- with interest 7.5% p.a. and costs; That on deposit of entire amount, both the parties be and are hereby entitled to withdraw the same at once; That the excessive amount, if any already withdrawn by the wife, shall be adjusted in the balance amount that may be deposited; 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. ;'vl • ■ # 7. That there be no order as to costs in this appeal. Sd/- G HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ^.BI SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To 1. The Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-Cum-VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge at Vijayawada, Krishna District. 2. Two CD Copies TK vna A HIGH COURT DATED:01/08/2025 DECREE MACMA No.290 of 2025 ^20 SEP 2025 M ^^Js^^urrent Sectioox*^ ALLOWING THE MACMA APHC010606142024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRUUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA lyiQJOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.290 of 2Q2fi Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, aggrieved by the Order and Decree dated 09.03.2023, passed in M.V.O.P.No.138 of 2018 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-Cum-VII I Additional District and Sessions Judge at Vijayawada, Krishna District. Between: 1. Pulleti Naga Lakshmi, V^p. Veera Venkateswara Rao Occ; Housewife, R/o. D.No.1-321, Kattavarni Mandal, Krishna District-521325. 2. Pulleti Veera Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Venkata Ranga years, R/o. D.No. 1-321, Kattavarni Cheruvu Krishna District - 521325. Aged 56 years, Cheruvu, Gudlavalleru Rao, Aged 60 Gudlavalleru Mandal, ...Appellants/Claimants/Respondents AND 1. Pulleti Pavani, W/o. Late Ajay Babu, Aged 30 R/o.D.No.1-41, China Pancft-aka, Kruthivennu Mandal 521324. years, Occ: Housewife, , Krishna District - .. -Respondent/Claimant 2. Sanjay Singh, S/o. Belash Singh, Aged 47 years, Occ: Driver of Bolero, R/o. Ojha Bogha Village, Panelj Post, Rothas District, Bihar-821307. 3. Sudhir Kumar Singh, S/o. Satya Deo Singh, Aged 64 years, Occ: Owner of Bolero, R/o. Manaura, Rontas, Dehrl on Sone, Bihar-821307. ...Respondents/Appellants 4. M/s National Insurance Company Limited, Rep. by its Legal Manager, TP Claims Hub, Governorpet, Vijayawada, Krishna District-520002. ...Respondent/Respondent lA NO: 3 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the tribunal not to release the amount toward the Respondent wife in pursuant to the decree passed in M.V.O.P.No.138 of 2018 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-Cum-VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge at Vijayawada vide Order and Decree dated 09.03.2023. 1 Counsel for the Petitioners Counsel for Respondent No.1 : Smt Kalla Tulasi Durgamba : Sri Subrahmanyeswara Rao Loya Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 & 3: None Appeared Counsel for Respondent No.4 Sri Manoj Kumar Bethapudi The Court made the following order: 1 APHC010606142024 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3527] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY 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: 290/2025 Between: aged '56 Kattavarni Cheruvu, I.Pulleti Naga Lakshmi, w/o. Veera Venkateswara Rao R/o. D.no. 1-321 years, occ: housewife Gudlavalleru Mandal, Krishna District - 521325. 2.Pulleti Veera Venkateswara Rao,, s/o. Venkata Ranga Rao, aged 60 Gudlavalleru Mandal, years, r/o. D.no.1-321, Kattavarni Cheruvu Krishna District - 521325. ...APPELLANT(S) AND I.Pulleti Pavani, W/O. Late Ajay Babu, Aged 30 Years, Occ Housewife, R/O.D.No.1-41, China Pandraka, Kruthivennu Mandal, Krishna District - 521324. 2.Sanjay singh, s/o. Belash singh, aged 47 years, occ: driver Of Bolero, r/o. Ojha Bogha village, panel] post, Rothas district, bihar- 821307. 3.Sudhir Kumar Singh, S/o.. Satya Deo Singh, Aged 64 Years, Occ: Owner Of Bolero, r/o. Manaura, rontas, dehrl on sone, bhihar- 821307. 4.M/S National Insurance Company Limited, REP. By Its Legal Manager, Tp Claims Hub, Governorpet, Vijayawada, KRISHNA DISTRICT-520002. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 Counsel for the Appellant(S): 1. KALLA TULASI DURGAMBA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.SUBRAHMANYESWARA RAO LOYA 2.MANOJ KUMAR BETHAPUDI The Court made the following: 1 *THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN AND *THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA +M.A.C.M.A. No.290 of 2025 % 01.08.2025 # Pulleti Naga Lakshmi, w/o. Veera Venkateswara Rao, aged 56 years occ: housewife, R/o. D.no. 1-321, Kattavarni Cheruvu, Gudlavalleru Mandal, Krishna District - 521325 and Another. Appellant Versus $ Pulleti Pavani, W/o, Late Ajay Babu, Aged 30 Years, Qcc: Housewife, R/o.D.No.1-41, China Pandraka, Kruthivenu Mandal, Krishna District- 521324 and 3 Others Respondents .'Counsel for the Appellant : Sri Kalla Tulasi Durgamba ! Counsel for the Respondents ; 1. Sri Subrahmanyeswara Rao Loya 2. Sri Manoj Kumar Bethapudi < Gist: > Head Note; ? Cases referred: 2015 see Online Guj 6541 2015 see Online Raj 10755 * THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN AND *THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA +M.A.C.M.A. N0.29Q of # Pulleti Naga Lakshmi, w/o. Veera Venkateswara Rao. aged^ occ. housewife, R/o. D.no. 1-321, Kattavarni Cheruvu Mandal, Krishna District - 521325 and Another. Versus m' Babu, Aged 30 Years Paidraka, Kruthivenu Mandal ‘521324 and 3 Others SARMA years. Gudlavalleru Appellant , Occ: Housewife Krishna District - Respondent/s DATE OF ORDER PRONOUNCED: 01.08.2025 SUBMITTED FOR APPRQVAI; THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers be allowed to see the Order? 2. Whether the copies of Order may be marked to Law Reporters/Journals? ^ 3. Whether Your Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order SARMA may Yes/No Yes/No 9 Yes/No 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.KRISHNAMOHAN AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA M.A.C.M.A.No.290 of 2025 JUDGMENT: [per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Hari Haranadha Sarma] I. Introductorv:- This is an appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 directed against the award and decree dated 09.03.2023 passed in M.V.O.P.No.138 of 2018 by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-VlII Additional District And Sessions Judge at Vijayawada [for short “the learned MACT”]. Claim was made for awarding compensation of Rs.1,00,00,000/- 2. [Rupees One crore only] for the death of one Pulleti Ajay Babu [hereinafter referred as ‘the deceased’]. Wife, mother and father of the deceased filed the claim petition. But, father of the deceased died during the pendency of the claim petition. Learned MACT awarded a compensation of Rs.56,56,400/- with 3. interest @7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation. directing the respondents 1 to 3 therein i.e., the driver, owner and the insurer of the offending vehicle, to pay the compensation while apportioning the same @Rs.41,56,400/- in favour of the wife and 4 Rs. 15,00,000/- in favour of the mother, of the deceased with the incidental ™ directionsas to withdrawal,costs etc.. 4. Mother of the deceased filed the present appeal feeling aggrieved by the apportionment made, questioning the same as a disproportionate and mainly contending that she is aged about 50 years, lost her husband and son, whereas her daughter-in-law/claimant No.1, re-married 04 months after the accident and she has a fresh life, therefore, the comparative dependency on the deceased is more with the appellant/mother of the deceased. Further, it is claimed that the learned MACT has apportioned minor part as compensation to her share. 5. There is no appeal either by the wife of the deceased or by the Insurance Company. 6. Occurrence of the accident is on 25.12.2017. Death of the deceased due to the accident, negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle, liability of the respondents to pay the compensation and entitlement of the claimants for compensation are all out of dispute. 7. The stand of the Insurance Company is neutral in respect of the apportionment of compensation. 8. Arguments are submitted for the appellant /mother of the deceased and the 1®* respondent/wife of the deceased as well as the Insurance 5 Company, touching the aspects relating to the apportionment of compensation only. Arguments for the appellant/mother of the deceased:- 9. [i] The appellant lost her son and husband. The respondent/wife of the deceased re-married. [ii] iii] The appellant is aged 50 years and she has to survive for the remaining life. She has none to support. The respondent/wife of the deceased since got re-married is having a fresh family to support her. [iv] Appellant/mother of the deceased is entitled for apportionment of compensation at least equally, if not more than wife of the deceased. [V] [Vi] Had father of the deceased alive, some compensation would have been awarded to him by the learned MACT, and the appellant being the mother of the deceased and wife of the claimant, is entitled for that amount, but while apportioning the compensation, learned MACT failed to consider the same. The 1®* respondent/wife has received some extent of death benefits payable by the department. Questioning the same a Suit is also filed covered by O.S.No.52 of 2019 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge at Bantumilli. [vii] 6 Arguments on behalf of the wife of the deceased - 10. [i] Remarriage is not a disqualification for entitlement to compensation. [ii] The entitlement shall be considered as on the date of cause of action viz., the occurrence of the accident and death of her husband not on the subsequent events. but [iii] The dependency of the claimants shall be considered with reference to their age, but not the other factors and wife of the deceased i entitled for substantial share, in view of the longevity of her life. IS [iv] The amount allotted becomes her personal property and estate, which will give her support and financial stability in every aspect. Extensive arguments are submitted by both sides reiterating their contentions, as sated above. 11. 12. Now the points that arise for determination in this appeal are:- 1) What shall be the reasonable ratio of apportionment that made among the wife and the mother in a compensation amount, payable for the death of a person in a motor vehicle accident? 2) Whether in the present case, the apportionment made by the learned MACT at Rs.41,56,400/- and Rs. 15,00,000/- respectively between the wife and mother of the deceased, out of the total compensation can be 7 amount of Rs.56,56,400/-, is proper or require any interference? If so to what extent? 3) What is the result of the appeal? Point No.1 and 2:- 13. The black day in the lives of two women, on 25.12.2017 i.e., the date of the accident, left them not only with tears but also with fears of future. Both of them lost their life partners. Financial support is the need of the hour. What are the other properties and benefits each of them had consequent to the death of the deceased is not relevant nor they are placed before this Court. In quantifying the compensation, the dependency of number of persons on the deceased may be one of the relevant factors. But for apportionment of compensation awarded, the extent of dependency is a relevant factor. Age of the 1®* claimant/wife of the deceased is 24 years as per the description in the claim petition and age of the mother of the deceased is ‘50’ years. As per normal expectations, the life span is considered as 100 The appellant /mother of the deceased is left with 2/4*'^ of her life journey and the wife of the deceased is having 3/4*^ Ratio between balance life of 50 years and 75 years comes to 2:3 viz., 40%:60%, which 14. years. can be rational and adopted. Further, the other relevant factors contribute 8 for apportionment are the ability to earn and the other sources a person have. The death of husband of the appellant is not in dispute. The argument that, the respondent/ wife of the deceased 15. remarried, cannot be considered as a disqualification. 16. In almost similar situations, the view of the other High Courts are as follows:- In Jagruthi ShiShir Banugariya [Patel] Vs. Ravji Kanthan Ahir and Ors.^ the apportionment was made at 50:50 among the mother and wife. In a case between Kamaiesh Vs. Babu Lai & Ors.^, while apportioning the compensation between the mother and wife of the deceased, the apportionment was made around Rs.6,00,000/- for the mother, out of the 17. compensation of Rs. 15,93,000/-. In the said case, initially the Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.8,81,000/- to the wife, and Rs.50,000/- only to the share of the mother, out of the compensation of Rs.9,31,000/-, where the wife was aged about ‘20’ years. 18. In the present case, upon considering the factual scenario, life span and extent of dependency among the wife and mother of the deceased as well as and other aspects, this Court finds that compensation can be awarded in 2:3 ratio i.e., 40% for the mother and 60% for the wife, which comes to Rs.22,62,560/- for the mother and Rs.33,93,840/- with "2015 see Online Guj 6541 ^2015 see Online Raj 10755 r:, 9 proportionate costs and interest, out of the total compensation of Rs.56,56,400/-. 19. In view of the above discussion and the reasons stated, points No.1 and 2 are answered concluding that appellant/mother of the deceased is entitled for 40% of the compensation amount viz., Rs.22,62,560/- and the 1®^ respondent /wife of the deceased, is entitled for 60% of the compensation amount viz., Rs. 33,93,840/- and the impugned Award and Decree dated 09.03.2023 passed in M.V.O.P.No.138 of 2018 interference accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case. requires ^ Point No.2:- 20. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the compensation amount of Rs.56,56,400/- with interest @7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation, is apportioned as follows:- [i] The appellant/petitioner No.2 in M.V.O.P.No.138 of 2018 is entitled for Rs.22,62,560/- with interest @7.5.% p.a. and costs. The 1®‘ respondent herein/ petitioner No.1 in M.V.O.P.No.138 of 2018 is entitled for Rs.33,93,840/- with interest 7.5% p.a. and costs. [ii] On deposit of entire amount, both the parties are entitled to withdraw the same at once. [iii] 10 [iv] The excessive amount, if any already withdrawn by the wife, shall be adjusted in the balance amount that may be deposited. No costs in the facts and circumstances. [V] As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand closed. _ Sd/- G HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER One Fair Copy to the Hoh’ble Sri Justice B KRISHNA MOHAN (For his Lordship’s Kind Perusal) AND One Fair Copy to the Hon’ble Sri Justice A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA (For his Lordship’s Kind Perusal) //TRUE COPY// \ To 1. The Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-Cum-VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge at Vijayawada, Krishna District, (with records if any) One CC to Sri Kalla Tulasi Durgamba, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri SubrahmaHyeswara Rao Loya, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri Manoj Kumar Bethapudi, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Nine (09) L.R. Copies. The Under Secretary, Unionsof India, Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs, New Delhi/ The Secretary, Andhra Pradesh High Court Advocates’ Association Library, High Court Buildings, Amaravathi. The Section Officer, V.RxSjsetion, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. (to dispatch the trial court records) 9. Two CD Copies 2. 3. 4. 6. 7. 8. TK vna HIGH COURT DATED:01/08/2025 JUDGMENT + DECREE MACMA No.290 of 2025 ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS