APHC010130472023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA TUESDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: Between: 1. CHIGICHERLA SIVAIAH, S/O Chinna Gurappa ,51 ,Cultivation ,R/O D.no 4/170A ,Medapuram village , Chennekotha palli Mandal , Anantapur District 2. Chigicherla Padmavathi, W/O C.Svaiah , Age 46,House wife ,R/O D.no 4/170A ,Medapuram village Mandal , Anantapur District 3. Chigicherla Sujitha, W/O Late C.Nagaraju , age 33,Private job,R/O D.no 4/170A ,Medapuram village , Chennekotha palli Mandal , Anantapur District 4. Chigicherla Siddarth, S/O Late C.Nagaraju , Age 13 4th petitioner Mino r Rep by it's N.Fand G By mother i.e 3rd petitioner R/O D.no 4/170A ,Medapuram village , Chennekotha palli Mandal , Anantapur District 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 123 OF 2023 1. CHIGICHERLA SIVAIAH, S/O Chinna Gurappa ,51 ,Cultivation ,R/O D.no 4/170A ,Medapuram village , Chennekotha palli Mandal , Anantapur District 2. Chigicherla Padmavathi, W/O C.Svaiah , Age 46,House wife ,R/O D.no 4/170A ,Medapuram village , Chennekotha palli Mandal , Anantapur District 3. Chigicherla Sujitha, W/O Late C.Nagaraju , age 33,Private job,R/O D.no 4/170A ,Medapuram village , Chennekotha palli Mandal , Anantapur District 4. Chigicherla Siddarth, S/O Late C.Nagaraju , Age 13, student , 4th petitioner Mino r Rep by it's N.Fand G By mother i.e 3rd petitioner R/O D.no 4/170A ,Medapuram village , Chennekotha palli Mandal , Anantapur District ...Petitioners THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1. CHIGICHERLA SIVAIAH, S/O Chinna Gurappa ,51 ,Cultivation ,R/O D.no 4/170A ,Medapuram village , Chennekotha palli 2. Chigicherla Padmavathi, W/O C.Svaiah , Age 46,House wife , Chennekotha palli 3. Chigicherla Sujitha, W/O Late C.Nagaraju , age 33,Private job,R/O D.no 4/170A ,Medapuram village , Chennekotha palli , student , 4th petitioner Mino r Rep by it's N.Fand G By mother i.e 3rd petitioner R/O D.no 4/170A ,Medapuram village , Chennekotha ...Petitioners 2 AND 1. OBULASETTY LAKSHMI RANGAIAH, Mjor ,Owner of the vehicle bearing AP-02-TA7947, D.NO 1/253,Ganesh nagur ,Tadipatri ,Anantapur Dist 2. New India Assurance co ltd, Rep by it's Divisonal Manager , Anantapuramu , 3. Thirupathaiah, S/O Pedaiah ,Driver of the Lorry , R/O 2-19, A.Kondapuram village , Putlur Mandal , Anantapur Dist ...Respondents Appeal filed under Order 41 of CPC praying thet the Highcourt may be pleased toappellants begs to prefer this Memorandum of Motor Accidents Civil Miscellaneous appeal against the Judgment and Decree of the Motor vehicles accidents claims tribunal Spl Judge for SC/ ST Cases ,Anantapuramu Having aggrieved by the order Dt 10-12-2018 passed in MVOP 269/2017 IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 may be pleased to condone the delay of 1446 days in filing the appeal before the Honourable High court and pass such Counsel for the Petitioners: G VENKATESULU Counsel for the Respondents: NARESH BYRAPANENI Counsel for the Respondents: The Court made the following order: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 123 OF 2023 JUDGMENT: The present appeal is preferred by the claimants/appellants assailing order dated 10.12.2018 passed in MVOP No.269 of 2017 on the file of VIII Additional District Judge, Ananthapuram. The Tribunal has determined compensation of Rs.20,06,000/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit with joint and several liability. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they were arrayed before the Tribunal. 3. (a) The claimants had filed M.V.O.P. No.269 of 2017 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation of Rs.25,00,000/– together with interest.The claimant Nos.1 and 2 are father and mother of the deceased and claimant Nos.3 and 4 are wife and minor son of the deceased. (b) On 03.05.2017 at about 12.30 p.m., while deceased was proceeding on motorcycle bearing No.AP 02 AE 0322 from Kalajyothi circle to RTC busstand, he was hit by lorry bearing No.AP 02 TA 7947, resultantly, he fell down and sustained 4 grievous injuries and died on spot. The incident was reported to police, who registereda Crime No.108 of 2017. After investigation into the crime, police have eventually filed charge sheet. The deceased was came to be aged 27 years, being Engineering Graduate was engaged as software engineer in soft tech solutions at Banglore and earning about Rs.30,000/- per month. (c) Basing on the aforesaid events, the claim came to be instituted. The driver and owner of the offending vehicle, who were arrayed as respondent Nos.1 and 3were set exparte and the 2ndrespondent insurance company contested the claim by filing written statement, inter alia,denying the manner in which the accident has occurred and that the driver of the offending vehicle was negligent in causing the accident. Even the earnings, age and the claim made to be disputed. (d) In order to prove the claim, claimants examined wife of the deceased as P.W.1 and eye witness to the incident was examined as P.W2 and got marked Ex.A.1 to A.6. For insurer R.W1 and R.W2 were examined besides marking Ex.B1 and Exs.X1 and X2. 5 (e) Based on the aforesaid pleadings and evidence on record tribunal has framed following issues: 1. Whether the 3rd respondent being the driver of the crime vehicle i.e., lorry bearing No.AP 02 TA 7947 driven the same in a rash and negligent manner, caused the accident resulting the death of Chigicherla Nagaraju? 2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation as prayed in the petitioner? 3. To what relief? (f) On analysis of the both oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal ultimately found that the driver of the offending vehicle caused the accident in a rash and negligent manner, resulting in death, which opinion was based on the evidence of P.W2 who was eyewitness besides Ex.A1-FIR,Ex.A2-postmortem report, Ex.A3-Inquest report and Ex.A4 -charge sheet. Insofar as the 2nd issue was concerned, the age of deceased was considered as 27 years and as no evidence was produced to sustain claim that the deceased was earning Rs.30,000/- per month, having regard to his educational qualification, income came to be assessed notionally as Rs.12,000/- per month. For the purpose of computing compensation, tribunal has deducted 6 1/4thtowards personal expenses and ultimately assessed Rs.1,08,000/- per annum, multiplier of 17 was applied as he was between the age group of 26 to 30 and accordingly, awarded compensation of Rs.18,36,000/- for loss of dependency. After adding conventional heads, total compensation of Rs.20,06,000/- came to be determined. (g) Assailing the same, the present appeal is filed to the extent of not awarding future prospectus. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant and Sri Naresh Naresh Byrapaneni, learned counsel for the respondent-insurance company. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant mainly contended that the tribunal, having computed the income of the deceased as Rs.12,000/- ought to have awarded future prospects @ 40% inline with the Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi [(2017) 16 SCC 680]. 6. Learned counsel for the Respondent-Insurance Company does not dispute or deny the quantum of compensation granted by Tribunal, nor not considering the future prospects, however, it 7 is contended that tribunal has awarded Rs.1,00,000/- towards love and affection as part of conventional head, which claimants are not entitled. 7. Perused the record and considered the rival submissions. 8. The only point that falls for consideration in the present appeal is as to whether the order passed by the tribunal awarding compensation is just and fair and suffers from any infirmity or perversity? 9. The deceased was aged 27 years and engineering graduate and he died on account of the accident caused by rash and negligent act of the driver of the offending vehicle. The manner in which the accident occurred has been established, which is not in dispute in the present appeal. Income of the deceased was assessed as 12,000/- per month, though claimants claimed at the rate of Rs.30,000/- per month. Insurer has not preferred any appeal assailing the findings recorded by tribunal in favor of claimants, in particular, the annual income of the deceased. The tribunal has merely considered income as 12,000/- per month and deducted 1/4th of the same towards 8 personal expenses of the deceased and arrived at total annual income as Rs.1,08,000/-. 10. As rightly contended by learned counsel for the appellant, the Tribunal has not added future prospectus. Deceased was a private employee and aged less than 30 years, therefore, claimants are entitled to the future prospects at the rate of 40% of annual income. Accordingly, this court orders the future prospects; which would come to Rs.1,08,000/- X 40% =Rs.43,200/- per year and thereby, total annual income scales upto Rs.1,51,200/-. Similarly, the tribunal has granted Rs.1,00,000/- towards love and affection, which claimants are not entitled interms of Hon’ble Apex Court judgment in Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi [(2017) 16 SCC 680]. 11. Accordingly, considering the income of deceased as ₹12,000/- per month, the compensation stands worked out as follows: 9 S.No. Description of the Head Amount Entitled in rupees 1 Net Annual Income ₹12,000/- x 12 = ₹1,44,000/- 2 Future prospects (at the age of 27 years) ₹57,600/- (i.e., 40% of the income) Total Income ₹2,01,600/- 3 Deduction towards personal expenditure (1/4th) ₹50,400/- 4 Total Annual Loss of Dependency ₹1,51,200/- 5 Multiplier of 17 for the age of 27 years 17 x ₹1,51,200/- = ₹25,70,400/- Conventional Heads: 6 (i) Loss of consortium (4 claimants) ₹1,93,600/- (₹48,400/- x 4) (ii) Loss of Estate ₹18,150/- (iii) Funeral expenses ₹18,150/- 7 Total Compensation ₹28,00,300/- 12. In the result, this M.A.C.M.A. is partly allowed in the following terms: (i) Appellants/Claimants are awarded compensation of ₹28,00,300/- as just and fair, with interest @ 7.5% per annum thereon from the date of claim petition till realization. 10 (ii) The 2nd respondent – Insurer is directed to deposit the compensation amount awarded by this Court within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (iii) On such deposit being made, the claimants 1 and 2 are entitled to withdraw (₹3,00,150/- each) along with interest accrued thereon @ 7.5% per annum, and claimant No. 3 is entitled to withdraw (₹14,00,000/-) along with interest accrued thereon @ 7.5% per annum and Claimant No.4 is entitled to withdraw (₹8,00,000/-) along with interest accrued thereon @ 7.5% per annum. In the event if the compensation amount is not deposited, appellants/claimants are at liberty to take steps for recovery in accordance with law. (iv) There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending consideration, if any, in this case shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Date: 12.08.2025 KKV 11 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN MACMA NO: 123/2023 Date: 12.08.2025 KKV