IMPORTANT POINT
IMPORTANT POINT
The court clarified the calculation of compensation in motor accident cases, emphasizing deductions for taxes and the application of established principles for assessing future prospects and personal expenses.

JUDGMENT :

(Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao, J.)

The present M.A.C.M.A. and Cross Objections are being disposed of by this common judgment, since M.A.C.M.A. filed by the Insurance Company and Cross Objections filed by the petitioners/claimants are directed against the very same order and decree dated 15.04.2024 passed in M.V.O.P.No.355 of 2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- I Additional District Judge, Khammam (for short ‘the Tribunal).

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter will be referred to as they are arrayed before the Tribunal.

3. Brief facts of the case are as follows :-

On 09.01.2021, the deceased/Poluri Srinivasa Rao was proceeding on his Motorcycle bearing No.AP-20-AU-0393 from his house to purchase groceries and when he reached Road No.2, Chaitanya Nagar, Khammam at about 10.00 hours, the driver of Maruthi Swift Car bearing No.TS 04 EY 5949 drove the said Car in a rash and negligent manner at high speed without taking any precautionary measures and dashed against the Motor Cycle of the deceased, as a result of which, the deceased fell on the road and sustained injuries over the head and other vital organs. Immediately, the deceased was shifted to KHIMS Hospital, Khammam. After receiving the first aid, due to his critical condition, the deceased was shifted to KIMS Hospital, Hyderabad and underwent treatment, but the Doctors advised to take back the deceased as his condition was hopeless. Accordingly, on 13.01.2021, the petitioners shifted the deceased to the Government Hospital, Khammam, where the doctors examined and declared as dead at about 15.40 hours. The petitioners spent a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- towards the medical expenses of the deceased. Based on the report, the Police Khammam II Town registered a case in Cr.No.16/2021 for the offence punishable under Section 337 IPC against the driver of the crime vehicle, and later altered it to Sec.304-A IPC. Prior to the accident, the deceased was hale and healthy, aged about 52 years. The deceased worked as a Government Teacher at UPS, Khanapuram Village, Wyra Mandal, Khammam District and used to draw Rs.64,515/- per month as salary. Therefore, the petitioners, who are the wife and son of the deceased, filed the claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.1,10,00,000/-.

4. Respondent No.1 filed a counter affidavit denying the averments made in the claim petition.

5. Respondent No.2 filed a counter affidavit denying the averments made in the claim petition. The 1st respondent, who is the driver of the offending vehicle, did not have a valid driving licence at the time of the accident, therefore, the 1st respondent alone is liable to pay compensation to the petitioners, and the 2nd respondent is not liable to pay any compensation to the petitioners.

6. On behalf of the petitioners, examined P.Ws.1 to 4 and Exs.A1 to A21 were marked. On behalf of the 2nd respondent- Insurance Company, examined RW-1 and marked Ex.B-1 Copy of the Insurance Policy.

7. After considering the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle and accordingly awarded an amount of Rs.90,71,136/- with interest @ 6 % per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization to be paid by respondents jointly and severally. Challenging the same, M.A.C.M.A.No.1103 of 2024 is filed by the Insurance Company and Cross Objections No.62 of 2024 is filed by the petitioners.

8. Learned counsel for the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company contended that since the deceased was a Government Teacher by profession and an Income Tax assessee, the Tribunal ought to have deducted Income Tax and Professional Tax from the earnings of the deceased in view of the settled law laid down by the Apex Court in Shamavathi Sharma and Others Vs. Karan Singh and others (2010 ACJ 1968) and Vimal Kanwar & Others Vs. Kishore Dan & Ors ( Civil Appeal No.5513 of 2012).

9. Learned