APHC010605612023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH TUESDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS Between: 1. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, D.NO.54 ZOOM COMPLEX, NEAR HOTEL SERVICE ROAD, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT 1. KHAMBAMPATI RAMA AGE 44 YEARS, DEPENDENT, R/O.2 VEEDHI, TELIKICHERLA, NALLAJERLA MANDAL, W.G.DISTRICT.. 2. SMT CHEERLA UMA SRIDEVI, W/O.MADHUSUDHANA RAO, HINDU, FEMALE, AGE 25 YEARS, R/O.DORAMAMIDI, BUTTAIGUDE MANDAL, W.G.DISTRICT. 3. KHAMBAMPATI SAI, S/O.VENKANNA, HINDU, MALE, AGE 19 YEARS, DEPENDENT, R/O.D.NO.2 VEEDHI, TELIKICHERLA, NALLAJERLA MANDAL, W.G.DISTRICT. 4. SMT KHAMBAMPATI RATNAM, W/O.GHANTA RAO, HINDU, FEMALE, AGE 65 94,KOTHAPET, RAMALAYAM VEEDHI, TELIKICHERLA, NALLAJERLA MANDAL, W.GDISTRICT. 5. NAKKA SURESH, , S/O.NAKKA RAMA SWAMY, HINDU, MALE, AGE 29 YEARS, DRIVER OF AGRO 2000 SELF LOAD CONCRETE MIXTURE BEARING NO. ANDHRA PRADESH 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 770 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, D.NO.54-15-48,1ST FLOOR, GUTTIKONDA ZOOM COMPLEX, NEAR HOTEL SERVICE ROAD, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT ...APPELLANT AND KHAMBAMPATI RAMA SITA, W/O.VENKANNA, HINDU, FEMALE, AGE 44 YEARS, DEPENDENT, R/O.2-94, KOTHAPET, RAMALAYAM VEEDHI, TELIKICHERLA, NALLAJERLA MANDAL, W.G.DISTRICT.. SMT CHEERLA UMA SRIDEVI, W/O.MADHUSUDHANA RAO, HINDU, FEMALE, AGE 25 YEARS, R/O.DORAMAMIDI, BUTTAIGUDE MANDAL, W.G.DISTRICT. KHAMBAMPATI SAI, S/O.VENKANNA, HINDU, MALE, AGE 19 YEARS, DEPENDENT, R/O.D.NO.2-94, KOTHAPET, RAMALAYAM VEEDHI, TELIKICHERLA, NALLAJERLA MANDAL, W.G.DISTRICT. SMT KHAMBAMPATI RATNAM, W/O.GHANTA RAO, HINDU, FEMALE, AGE 65 YEARS, DEPENDENT, R/O.D.NO.2 94,KOTHAPET, RAMALAYAM VEEDHI, TELIKICHERLA, NALLAJERLA MANDAL, W.GDISTRICT. NAKKA SURESH, , S/O.NAKKA RAMA SWAMY, HINDU, MALE, AGE 29 YEARS, DRIVER OF AGRO 2000 SELF LOAD CONCRETE MIXTURE BEARING NO. ANDHRA PRADESH 05 DT 4164, MODEL IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3333] TUESDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA APPEAL NO: 770 OF 2023 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, REP. BY ITS 48,1ST FLOOR, GUTTIKONDA ZOOM COMPLEX, NEAR HOTEL SERVICE ROAD, VIJAYAWADA, ...APPELLANT SITA, W/O.VENKANNA, HINDU, FEMALE, 94, KOTHAPET, RAMALAYAM VEEDHI, TELIKICHERLA, NALLAJERLA MANDAL, W.G.DISTRICT.. SMT CHEERLA UMA SRIDEVI, W/O.MADHUSUDHANA RAO, HINDU, FEMALE, AGE 25 YEARS, R/O.DORAMAMIDI, BUTTAIGUDEM KHAMBAMPATI SAI, S/O.VENKANNA, HINDU, MALE, AGE 19 94, KOTHAPET, RAMALAYAM VEEDHI, TELIKICHERLA, NALLAJERLA MANDAL, W.G.DISTRICT. SMT KHAMBAMPATI RATNAM, W/O.GHANTA RAO, HINDU, YEARS, DEPENDENT, R/O.D.NO.2- 94,KOTHAPET, RAMALAYAM VEEDHI, TELIKICHERLA, NAKKA SURESH, , S/O.NAKKA RAMA SWAMY, HINDU, MALE, AGE 29 YEARS, DRIVER OF AGRO 2000 SELF LOAD CONCRETE 05 DT 4164, MODEL 2 2018, R/O.D.NO.4-4, KOMUGUDEM, TADEPALLIGUDEM MANDAL, W.G.DISTRICT. 6. M/S SRI MURTHY CONSTRUCTIONS, REP. BY K.TATA REDDY, OWNER OF AGRO 2000 SELF LOAD CONCRETE MIXTURE BEARING NO. AP 05 DT 4164, R/OP D.NO.1-172, NEAR AMBERCHERAKA, RAVULAPALEM, E.G.DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Appeal filed under Order 41 of CPC praying that the High Court may be pleased to allow this appeal by setting aside the decree and judgment passed in M.V.O.P.No.130 of 2020 on the file of The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal- Cum - Principal District Judge, West Godavari at Eluru, Dated 21st day of July, 2023 and pass 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 pleased to condone the delay of 3 days in filing the M.A.C.M.A. against the decree and judgment M.V.O.P.No.130 of 2020 on the file of The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Cum - Principal District Judge, West Godavari at Eluru, Dated 21st day of July, 2023, and pass IA NO: 2 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 pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the decree and judgment dated 21st day of July, 2023 passed in M.V.O.P.No.130 of 2020 on the file of The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Cum - Principal District Judge, West Godavari at Eluru, including execution proceedings, pending disposal of the main M.A.C.M.A., and pass Counsel for the Appellant: 1. GUDI SRINIVASU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. Y V ANIL KUMAR 2. T V JAGGI REDDY 3 The Court made the following Judgment: JUDGMENT:- The Insurance Company/ Respondent No.3 filed the present Appeal challenging the order and decree 21.07.2023 in M.V.O.P.No.130 of 2020 on the file of the Court of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, West Godavari at Eluru, whereby and whereunder the Tribunal granted compensation of Rs.9,20,000/- to the Claimants/ Respondent Nos.1 to 4 herein, as against the claim of 10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakhs only) for the death of Mr. Khambampati Venkanna (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) in a motor accident that occurred on 14.03.2020. 2. For the purpose of convenience, the parties will be referred to as they are arrayed before the Tribunal. 3. The case of the Petitioner is briefly as follows: On 14.03.2020 at 9.00 a.m, the deceased started from his house to attend the road concrete work at Kunchanapalli Road. At 4.00 p.m, the deceased was loading the cement mixture into the Agro 2000 Self loading concrete mixture bearing No. AP 05 DT 4164 (CEV). While he doing so, deceased left leg fell into the mixture and crushed. Immediately he shifted to Government General Hospital, Eluru. While undergoing treatment, he succumbed to injuries and died on 05.05.2020. A crime is registered against the Respondent No.1 under Section 304-A of IPC vide Crime No. 200 of 2020. 4. Before the Tribunal, Respondent No.2 remained ex parte. 4 5. Respondent No.1/ driver of offending vehicle filed Written Statement contending that the accident was happened only due to negligence on the part of the deceased, but not negligence on the part of the Respondent No.1. There is no rash and negligent act from the Respondent No.1.The offending vehicle is validly insured with the Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.1 had valid driving license to drive the offending vehicle. 6. Respondent No.3/ Insurance Company filed Written Statement contending that the manner in which the accident was occurred. The offending vehicle was not in moving condition on the date of accident as there was an act of mixing of concrete. There is no rash and negligent driving of the Respondent No.1. While loading the mixture, the left leg of the deceased fell into mixture and that there was the negligence on the part of deceased. There is a contributory negligence. There is violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy. Therefore, the Respondents 1 and 2 alone are liable to pay compensation. 7. Basing on the pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues for trial: “1. Whether the accident is caused due to the rash and negligent act of 1st respondent driver of Agro 2000 self loading concrete mixture bearing No. AP 05 DT 4164 (CEV) causing death of deceased? 2. Whether the Petitioners are entitled for compensation, if so, to what amount and from whom? 3. To what relief?” 5 7. On behalf of the Claimants, P.Ws 1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A1 to A5 were marked. On behalf of respondent No.3/Insurance Company, R.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.B1 and B2 were marked by RW.1 and Ex.X1 and X2 were marked by RW.2. 8. After hearing both parties and after considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition against Respondent Nos.1 to 3, awarding compensation of Rs.9,20,000/- with subsequent interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of realization and directed Respondents No.1 to 3 to pay jointly and severally the said amount within three months from the date of the order. 9. Aggrieved by the said award, the Respondent No.3/Insurance Company preferred this appeal contending that the Tribunal failed to consider that the accident was occurred purely due to the rash and negligence act of the deceased himself while loading the cement mixture into concrete mixture bearing No. AP 05 DT 4164 and succumbed to injuries. Further, the driver of the offending vehicle was not having valid and effective driving license, as such the owner of the offending vehicle violated the terms and conditions of the policy and provisions of M.V.Act by allowing a person to drive the offending vehicle. The Respondent No.2 is a married daughter of the deceased and she is not dependent on the earnings of the deceased. Therefore, the Appellant/ insurance company is not liable to pay compensation. It is further contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is exorbitant and excessive, therefore, prayed to allow the Appeal. 6 10. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Claimants/ Respondent No.1 to 4 herein have supported the impugned award and prayed to dismiss the appeal. 11. Now the point for consideration is: Whether the order of the Tribunal needs any interference? POINT: 12. The Appeal has been preferred by the Insurance Company on the ground that the Tribunal failed to observe that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent act on the part of the deceased himself and that there was no rash and negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle and hence, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay any compensation and also as per Ex.B1 i.e Insurance Policy do not cover the risk of the coolie as the owner of the offending vehicle did not paid the premium to that effect. 13. On perusal of the Award, it can be observed that as per the evidence of PW-1 on 14.03.2020 at 9.00 a.m the deceased started from his house to attend the road concrete work at Kunchanapalli Road. At 4.00 p.m, the deceased was loading the cement mixture into the Agro 2000 Self loading concrete mixture bearing No. AP 05 DT 4164 (CEV). While he doing so, deceased left leg fell into the mixture and crushed. Immediately he shifted to Government General Hospital, Eluru. While undergoing treatment, he succumbed to injuries and died on 05.05.2020. 7 14. Admittedly, it is not the case of the Claimants that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent act on the part of the deceased himself, but the accident occurred while loading the cement mixture into the Agro 2000 Self loading concrete mixture bearing No. AP 05 DT 4164 (CEV). While so, deceased left leg fell into the mixture and got crushed. In support of the evidence of Claimants, PW-2 was examined, who is an eye-witness to the said accident, who categorically deposed that on the date of accident, the deceased attended the cement mixture work at about 4.00 p.m the Respondent No.1 drove the offending vehicle, without observing the deceased, because of which deceased fell into the mixture. As a result, the left leg got crushed and while undergoing treatment, the deceased died. 15. Considering the evidence of PW-1, who is Claimant No.1, coupled with copy of FIR i.e Ex.A1; Inquest Report i.e Ex.A2; Charge Sheet i.e Ex.A5, which was filed after thorough investigation, wherein PW-2 is shown as witness No.6 and reasons assigned in the Charge Sheet for cause of injury that on 14.03.2020 at about 4.00 p.m the driver of the offending vehicle drove the same in a rash and negligence manner while reversing the vehicle and ran over the deceased, as a result, the deceased left leg was crushed and while undergoing treatment, the deceased was died, the Tribunal answered the issue No.1 in favour of the Claimants holding that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the Respondent No.1. 16. As far as quantum of compensation is concerned, though it is the case of the claimants that the deceased was earning Rs.18,000/- per month, in the 8 absence of the documentary evidence, the Tribunal considered the notional monthly income of the deceased as Rs.250/- per day. As there are 3 dependents in the present case, 1/3rd has to be deducted towards his personal expenses. After deducting 1/3rd, the monthly income of the deceased would come to Rs.5,000/- (Rs.7,500/- – Rs.2,500/-). 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 44 years, as per the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in “Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation1”, the loss of dependency would come to (Rs.60,000/- x 17) Rs.8,40,000/-. 17. In addition to the above, the Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate, and Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs. 10,000/- towards transportation charges. In total, the Tribunal below awarded Rs.9,20,000/- to the Claimants. 18. Considering the material available on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the amount of Rs.9,20,000/- awarded by the Tribunal to the Claimants, for the death of the deceased, was on reasonable basis and is sustainable under law, which needs no interference. 19. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. No costs. 1 2009 ACJ 1298 9 Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 31.03.2026 KK