1 MACMA NO. 568 OF 2023 VS,J. APHC010452192023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 568/2023 Between: 1. SINGA MALYADRI,, S/O. SUBBARAYUDU, NOW AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, 2. SINGA PRASAD,, S/O. MALYADRI, NOW AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF NORTH MOPUR VILLAGE, ALLUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT ...APPELLANT(S) AND 1. KANISETTY SAI THEJA, S/O. SUDHAKARA BABU, NOW AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, (OWNER-CUM-DRIVER OF THE CAR BEARING NO. AP 10 AK 7070) R/O. PLOT NO. 64, NEAR IRON FACTORY, KARIKRISHNA BABU NAGAR, KOTHUR AK NAGAR, NELLORE. 2. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD, REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, GANDHI NAGAR, NELLORE, (INSURER OF THE OFFENDING VEHICLE CAR BEARING NO. AP 10 AK 7070 ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Appellant(S): 1. SIVA PRASAD KATAKAMSETTY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. KIRAN KUMAR BALIGAMSETTI 2. The Court made the following: 2 MACMA NO. 568 OF 2023 VS,J. THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 568/2023 J U D G M E N T: 1. This Motor Accidents Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (for short MACMA) has been preferred by the Appellants/Petitioners being aggrieved by the Order and Decree dated 06.07.2023 in M.V.O.P.No.425 of 2019 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short MACT) –cum- III Additional District Judge, Nellore, awarding Rs.4,85,500/- to the petitioners towards compensation as against claim of Rs.10,00,000/- for the death of deceased – Sigha Lakshmi in a motor vehicle accident. For the sake of convenience and to avoid confusion, the parties hereinafter are referred to as they were arrayed before the Tribunal i.e., appellants herein as Petitioners and Respondents herein as Respondents. 2. The Petitioners being husband and son of the deceased – Sigha Lakshmi filed this petition under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-, together with interest and costs, for the death of S.Lakshmi in a road accident. 3. Brief averments of the claim petition are that:- The deceased Sigha Lakshmi was aged 42 years, hale and healthy and by doing tailoring earning 3 MACMA NO. 568 OF 2023 VS,J. Rs.13,000/- per month and contributing the same to her family at the time of her death in a road accident. i. On 04.04.2018 the deceased Sigha Lakshmi and her family members and relatives after having Darshan at Kanipakam were returning from Kanipakam temple in Indica VS Car bearing No.AP10 AK 7070 driven by the 1st respondent Sai Theja. At about 6.10 p.m, when the car reached Chittoor - Tirupathi National Highway near Rangaiahgaripalli village petrol bunk, Pakala Mandal, 1st respondent drove the same in a rash and negligent manner at high speed, due to which, he lost control over the steering and dashed the opposite coming Ertiga Car bearing No.TS 10 EA 9887. As a result, the deceased Sigha Lakshmi died on the spot and the inmates of both the cars sustained severe bleeding injuries. Immediately, all the injured persons were shifted to Ruia Hospital, Tirupathi and both the vehicles were damaged. The dead body of the deceased Sigha Lakshmi was sent to the Government Hospital, Chittoor, for postmortem examination and after postmortem examination the dead body of the deceased was brought back to her village by spending Rs.10,000/- towards transportation charges and also spent Rs.5,000/- towards funeral and obsequies expenses of the deceased. ii. The matter was reported to the Station House Officer, Pakala Police Station, Chittoor District, and the same was registered as a case in Crime No. 4 MACMA NO. 568 OF 2023 VS,J. 49/2018 for the offence punishable under Sections 304-A, 338 and 279 of IPC against the driver of the car bearing No.AP 10 AK 7070 i.e., 1st respondent. iii. 1st respondent, who is the driver-cum-owner of the offending vehicle, had committed the accident and the 2nd respondent is the Insurance Company and Insurance Policy was in force as on the date of accident, both the respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the petitioners. 4. The 1st respondent remained ex-parte. 5. The 2nd respondent filed counter denying the age of the deceased, her earnings, manner of accident, petitioners are legal heirs of the deceased and contended that, the accident was occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the opposite vehicle Ertiga Car bearing No.TS 10 EA 9887 and as such the owner and Insurance Company of the opposite car are proper and necessary parties and the compensation, if any, has to be apportioned against owners of both the vehicles, as there was contributory negligence on the part of the drivers of both the vehicles and prayed to dismiss the petition. 6. Basing on the above pleadings the following issues were settled for trial by the tribunal:- 1) Whether the alleged accident occurred on 04.04.2018 at 06.10 P.M, on Chittoor - Tirupathi NH 140 near the Rangaiahparipalli village petrol bunk, Pakala Mandal, Chittoor District was due to rash and negligent act of the 5 MACMA NO. 568 OF 2023 VS,J. driver of the car bearing Registration No.AP 10 AK 7070 and whether it resulted to the death of the deceased/Sigha Lakshmi? 2) Whether the claimants are entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from which of the respondents? 3) To what relief? 7. During the course of trial, on behalf of the claim petitioners, 1st Petitioner – Sigha Malyadri got examined as P.W.1, one of the inmates of offending vehicle – Kanisetty Sai Deepak got examined as P.W.2 and got marked Ex.A.1 – Attested copy of F.I.R in Cr.No.49 of 2018, Ex.A.2 – attested copy of inquest report, Ex.A.3 – attested copy of postmortem certificate, Ex.A.4 – attested copy of charge sheet, Ex.A.5 – attested copy of M.V.I report. On behalf of Respondents, Administrative officer of 2nd respondent insurance company by name B.Suresh got examined as R.W.1 and got marked Ex.B.1 – Insurance policy. 8. Upon hearing both sides, upon perusing the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition of petitioners by awarding Rs.4,85,500/- as compensation together with interest at 9% p.a from the date of petition till the date of deposit, along with costs, directing the 2nd respondent to deposit compensation amount within one (01) month from the date of order by deducting 50% amount towards contributory negligence. 6 MACMA NO. 568 OF 2023 VS,J. 9. Being aggrieved by the said order and decree the appellants/ Petitioners have preferred present appeal on the grounds that – The tribunal erred in apportioning the compensation amount in between, respondents to deposit 50% and owner and insurer of car bearing Regn. No.TS 10 EA 9887 on the other set. The Tribunal ought to have considered the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.13,000/- instead of Rs.6,000/- as a tailor and also her services to the family while evaluating loss of dependency and grant more compensation than claimed. The tribunal erred in awarding interest at 9% p.a instead of 12% per annum. Hence, prayed to allow the appeal by setting aside the order and Decree dated 06.07.2023 in M.V.O.P.No.425 of 2019 passed by the Chairman, MACT –cum- III Additional District Judge, Nellore and to enhance the compensation amount by directing the respondents to deposit Rs.9,70,000/- as determined by the Tribunal or more jointly and severally with interest at 12% p.a from the date of filing original petition till the date of realization, besides proportionate costs. 10. Heard the learned counsel for appellants as well as respondents. 11. Now the point for determination is – Whether the order/award passed by the Tribunal needs any interference? 12. POINT: To prove the manner of accident, claimant No.1 got examined himself as P.W.1, who categorically deposed that the accident 7 MACMA NO. 568 OF 2023 VS,J. occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending car bearing No.AP 10 AK 7070. In support of his case, P.W.1 got marked Exs.A.1 to A.5. Considering the material available on record, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of both the drivers and attributed 50% contributory negligence on the part of drivers of both the vehicles. However, on perusal of Ex.A.4 charge sheet, it is an admitted fact that charge sheet has been filed against the driver of the Indica VS car bearing No.AP 10 AK 7070 alone as he drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed Ertiga car bearing No.TS 10 EA 9887, resulting death of the deceased. In such a case, this Court is of the opinion that the Tribunal relying on Ex.A.4 Charge sheet and the evidence of P.W.1, ought to have held that the accident has occurred due to rash and negligent driving of Indica VS car bearing No.AP 10 AK 7070, and ought to have fixed the entire liability on the driver of Indica VS car bearing No.AP 10 AK 7070, but not on the driver of Ertiga car bearing No.TS 10 EA 9887, who is no way responsible for the said accident. In view of the said discussion, this Court is of the opinion that the accident has occurred due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1, who is the driver of Indica VS car bearing No.AP 10 AK 7070. Therefore, the finding of the Tribunal that there was contributory negligence on the part of the drivers of both the vehicles i.e. the Indica VS car AP 10 AK 7070 and Ertiga Car bearing No.TS 10 EA 9887 is liable to be set aside. 8 MACMA NO. 568 OF 2023 VS,J. 13. As per the evidence of P.W.1, the deceased was working as Tailor and earning Rs.13,000/- per month. In the absence of the documentary evidence, the Tribunal held that the deceased was a house wife, but relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in “Rajendra Singh Vs. National Insurance Company and others (Civil Appeal No.2624 of 2020 dated 18.06.2020) considered the notional income of house wife, for the services rendered by her in taking care of husband and children, as Rs.6,000/- per month. As there are 2 dependents in the present case, 1/3rd has to be deducted towards her personal expenses. After deducting 1/3rd, the monthly income of the deceased would come to Rs.4,000/- (Rs.6,000 – Rs.2,000). As the age of the deceased is 42 years as on the date of the accident, she is entitled for an additional amount of 25% of her income towards her future prospects as held by the Apex Court in “National Insurance Company Vs. Pranay Sethi1”, as such the monthly income of the deceased would come to Rs.5,000/-. (Rs.4,000 +1,000). Accordingly, annual income would come to Rs.60,000 (Rs.5,000 X 12). After applying the appropriate multiplier i.e., 14 for the age group of 41-45 years, as per the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in “Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation2”, the loss of dependency would come to (Rs.60,000 X14) Rs.8,40,000/-. 1 2018 ACJ 2782 2 2009 ACJ 1298 9 MACMA NO. 568 OF 2023 VS,J. 14. In addition to the above, the Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs.16,500/- towards funeral expenses, Rs.44,000/- towards spousal consortium to petitioner No.1, Rs.44,000/- towards parental consortium to petitioner No.2, Rs.16,500/- towards loss of estate, Rs.10,000/- towards transportation charges. In total, the Tribunal below awarded Rs.9,71,000/- to the claimants. 15. In view of the reasoning given in issue No.1 i.e. on the point of contributory negligence as referred above, the Motor Accidents Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed enhancing the compensation from Rs.4,85,500/- to Rs.9,71,000/- directing respondent No.2 alone to deposit the compensation amount within one (01) month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and on such deposit, the compensation amount shall be apportioned among the claimants in the same manner and ratio as ordered by the Tribunal. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, pending miscellaneous applications, if any shall stand closed. _______________________ SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA KS Dated 23.02.2026. 10 MACMA NO. 568 OF 2023 VS,J. 260 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 568/2023 DATED 23.02.2026 KS