APHC010780782018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3527] MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST 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: 2798/2018 Between: 1. SMT. KALAVAPUDI VIJAYA LAKSHMI, W/O. PAVAN KUMAR, HINDU, FEMALE, AGED 34 YEARS, HOUSEWIFE, R/O. DOOR NO.14-45-30, RAMARAOPETA, TADEPALLIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2. KALAVAPUDI SATYA BHARATH, S/O. PAVAN KUMAR, HINDU, FEMALE, AGED 19 YEARS, R/O. DOOR NO.14-45-30, RAMARAOPETA, TADEPALLIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 3. KALAVAPUDI SRINIVASA CHAKRAVARTHI, S/O. PAVAN KUMAR, HINDU, FEMALE, AGED 19 YEARS, R/O. DOOR NO.14-45-30, RAMARAOPETA, TADEPALLIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. RES 2 AND 3 PETITIONERS BEING MINORS REP BY THEIR MOTHER NATURAL GUARDIAN 1ST PETITIONERS ...APPELLANT(S) AND 1. GUTTUMUKKALA MADHAV VARNIA RAJU, S/O. SURYANARAYANA RAJU, HINDU, MALE, AGED 55 YERS, DRIVER OF LORRY BEARING NO.AP 31 TW 4459, R/O. GAVARAPALEM VILLAGE, ANAKEALLI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM. 2. SRIPALLI RAMA KRISHNA RAJU, S/O. S. RAJA BABU, HINDU, MALE, AGED 48 YEARS, OWNER OF LORRY BEARING NO.AP 31 2 HBKM,J & HAHHS,J M.A.C.M.A.No.2798 of 2018 TW 4459, R/O. DOOR NO.3-99/1, ARUNACHALAM COLONY, AMBERUPURAM, GOVADA (POST), CHODAVARAM MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM. 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY, REP. BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, TADEPALLIGUDERN, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Appeal filed under Order 41 of CPC praying thet the Highcourt may be pleased toaggrieved by the Decree and Judgment dt. 05-07-2018 passed in M.V.O.P.No.790 of 2016 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Judge, West Godavari, Eluru, the ,above named appellants beg to present the present Civil Miscellaneous. Appeal for the following among other Counsel for the Appellant(S): 1. B V KRISHNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. NARESH BYRAPANENI 2. 3 HBKM,J & HAHHS,J M.A.C.M.A.No.2798 of 2018 The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice B. Krishna Mohan) Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent/Insurance Company. 2. This appeal arises against the order in M.V.O.P.No.790 of 2016 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Judge, West Godavari, Eluru, dated 05.07.2018, wherein the compensation amount of Rs.14,99,944/- with interest @ 7.5% p.a. was awarded by the Tribunal along with the incidental directions. 3. The Tribunal considered the following heads for the purpose of determining the total compensation as under: Sl.No. Name of the head Amount (Rs.) 1 Compensation for loss of love and affection, care and custody of the petitioners 30,000-00 2 Funeral Expenses 15,000-00 3 Loss of Consortium 40,000-00 4 Loss of Estate 15,000-00 5 Compensation for loss of earnings, dependency and maintenance 13,99,944-00 Total 14,99,944-00 4. Whereas the claimants made a claim of Rs.1,00,00,000/- for the death of the deceased Mr. Kalavapudi Pavan Kumar in a road accident, which took place on 29.08.2016 opposite to STVN School, Pentapadu. The 1st appellant is the wife and the appellant Nos.2 and 3 were the children of the deceased. He was aged 42 years at the time of accident. 4 HBKM,J & HAHHS,J M.A.C.M.A.No.2798 of 2018 5. The appellants/petitioners therein averred that his monthly income was Rs.38,000/- with incentives in Ozo Agricare Private Ltd., Tadepalligudem. The appellants herein/petitioners therein were examined as P.W.1 to P.W.5 and Ex.A1 to A10 were marked on their behalf. For the respondents Ex.B1 copy of the Policy was marked. Ex.A10 is the salary certificate produced by the claimants and Ex.A2 is the inquest report which would support that, the petitioner was working in the Ozo Agricare Private Ltd., Tadepalligudem at the time of accident. The P.W.3 also deposed about the certificate issued by the said Company in Ex.A10. In the said Ex.A10 the salary was shown at Rs.25,000/- p.m., house allowance is shown as Rs.3,000/-, the travelling allowance is shown as Rs.10,000/- but the evidence came on record does not support any drawing of house rent allowance and travelling allowance by the deceased by the time of the accident. 6. Even it is to be considered, but it is only towards accident and it cannot be considered as part of the salary to take home. But the Tribunal below erroneously appreciated the Ex.A10 with respect to the salary and fixed the notional income of Rs.10,000/-, which is not born out of their record. Hence, we take it the income of the deceased fixed at Rs.25,000/- p.m. 7. The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent-Insurance Company submits that since the P.W.3 was in the company which issued Ex.A10, it cannot be taken into consideration in totality and the petitioners/claimants did not file any bank statement and as such, the Tribunal rightly fixed the notional income of 5 HBKM,J & HAHHS,J M.A.C.M.A.No.2798 of 2018 the deceased as Rs.10,000/-. But as the P.W.3 in the cross examination also deposed that the Ex.A10 was issued by the said company and as it was not disputed with respect to the consolidated pay of Rs.25,000/-, the income of the deceased will be taken as Rs.25,000/- p.m. The respondents’ counsel also submits that the P.W.5 is a summoned witness. 8. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the income of the deceased is calculated as under by us by modifying the order of the Tribunal. Rs.25,000/- p.m. X12- Rs.3,00,000/-. After deduction of 1/3rd income towards personal expenses i.e., Rs.2,00,000/- X12, which comes to Rs.24,00,000/-. Loss of dependency Rs.24,00,000/- Loss of consortium Rs. 1,20,000/- Loss of estate Rs. 15,000/- Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- Total Rs.25,50,000/- 7. The total amount of Rs.25,50,000/- should have been the award of compensation, which is to be entitled by the appellants/petitioners. The interest rate @ 7.5% is maintained as it is. Accordingly, the appellants/petitioners are entitled for the above said compensation as determined by this Court under the above said heads. 6 HBKM,J & HAHHS,J M.A.C.M.A.No.2798 of 2018 8. The difference of amount shall be deposited, if already the Insurance Company deposited some of the awarded compensation amount to the credit of the M.V.O.P. within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. On such deposit by the 3rd respondent/Insurance Company, the appellants/petitioners are entitled to withdraw the same without furnishing any security in proportionality as awarded by the Tribunal below. 9. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN __________________________________ JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA 21.07.2025 PGT