IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

MACMA No.1318 of 2019

DATE: 03.12.2025

Between:

Y. Venkata Ramana and two others.

…..Claimants/Appellants

AND

B. Laxma Reddy and another ….Respondents/Respondents

JUDGMENT:

This appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,

1988, is filed by the appellants–claimants challenging the order and decree dated 12.03.2015 passed in M.V.O.P.No.358 of 2012 by the Chairman, MACT-cum-XIII Additional Chief Judge (FTC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad, whereby the Tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs.9,92,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum in favour of the appellants-claimants i.e., wife and children of as against the claim of Rs.20,00,000/- for the death of the deceased-Y. Lingaiah, in a motor

vehicle accident.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 31.03.2011 at about 07.30 A.M., when the deceased was proceeding on motorcycle bearing No.AP-24K-1062 along with the pillion rider and 18 months boy, when they reached the Raasi Colony Gate on Narketpally/Addenki highway at the same one lorry bearing No.AP- 24-TA-1116 came in a rash and negligent manner in high speed and dashed to the deceased motorcycle resulting the deceased sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. The Police of Wadapally has registered a case vide Crime No.37 of 2011 under Sections 337 and 304-A of IPC against the driver of the said lorry. Stating that prior to the accident the deceased was hale and healthy earning a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month, the appellants-claimants i.e., wife and children of the deceased filed the aforesaid claim petition before the Tribunal, seeking compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- on account of the death of the deceased. Before the Tribunal, respondent No.1–owner of the lorry remained ex parte. Respondent No.2–insurance company filed a counter denying the manner of the accident and its liability and contended that the claim was excessive and untenable. On appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry driver and that taking the income of the deceased at Rs.7,166/- per month and applying the multiplier ‘16’, the Tribunal quantified total compensation at Rs.9,92,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants/claimants filed the present appeal seeking enhancement.

3. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record.

4. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Tribunal failed to consider Ex.A7 salary certificate, which evidenced the deceased’s monthly income at Rs.10,000/-, and instead adopted an arbitrary figure of Rs.7,166/- without any basis. It is further submitted that conventional heads were awarded on the lower side and the computation requires reconsideration in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi, 2017 ACJ 2700

5. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2-Insurance Company supported the impugned award and submitted that the compensation granted by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and the same need not be enhanced.

6. There is no dispute regarding the finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry bearing No.AP 24 TA 1116 and that both respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation. The said finding is based on oral and documentary evidence on record.

7. Coming to the quantum, the Tribunal, while accepting the age of the deceased as 35 years, did not consider Ex.A7 placed by the claimants to establish his monthly income. The deceased was working as a driver in “Sai Associates”, and even the Tribunal in the award refers to his occupation and the absence of rebuttal evidence from the insurer. On a reasonable assessment and keep