IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY M.A.C.M.A.No.273 of 2019 DATE :28.11.2025 Between:

The United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Represented by its Legal Managaer, Service HUB, 2^nd Floor, Church Building, Tilak Road, Abida, Hyderabad – 500 001 …..Appellant AND K. Shanta Bai and six others ….Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY M.A.C.M.A.No.273 of 2019

JUDGMENT:

This appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is filed by the appellant–Insurance Company challenging the judgment and decree dated 15.11.2018 passed in M.V.O.P.No.589 of 2015 by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-XII Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, at Secunderabad (for short “the Tribunal”), whereby the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.14,30,000/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization, for the death of Raj Kumar Khare (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”) in a motor vehicle accident.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 19.01.2015 the deceased, while proceeding on foot near Arts College Bus Stop, Osmania University Campus, was hit by a two-wheeler bearing No.AP-29-AU- 6716 being driven in a rash and negligent manner, due to which the deceased fell down and sustained grievous injuries. Immediately he was shifted to Gandhi Hospital, Secunderabad, where he succumbed to injuries on 20.01.2015, while undergoing treatment. Stating that the deceased was hale and healthy, aged about 45 years as on the date of accident and used to earn Rs.12,000/- per month, the wife, children, and mother of the deceased filed the aforesaid claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.18,00,000/- against the respondent Nos.1 to 3, who are owner, insurer and driver of the crime vehicle.

3. Before the Tribunal, the respondent Nos.1 to 3 filed counters and opposed the claim petition. The Tribunal, on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record, held that theaccident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle by respondent No.3and awarded a total compensation of Rs.14,30,000/-. Challenging the compensation as excessive, the appellant-Insurance Company filed the present appeal.

4. Learned Standing Counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company submitted that the Tribunal erred in taking the income of the deceased at Rs.8,000/- per month, in adding 25% towards future prospects without proof of income. It is further submitted that the interest at 9% per annum awarded by the Tribunal is excessive, and that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Mannat Johal and others1 held that 7.5% per annum is the reasonable rate of interest.

5. On perusal of the record, this Court is of the opinion that the Tribunal has properly considered the evidence on record while determining the income of the deceased, addition towards future

1 AIR 2019 SC 2079

prospects, and amounts under various heads. The compensation awarded cannot be said to be excessive or arbitrary. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the quantum of compensation.

6. However, insofar as the rate of interest is concerned, the submission of the learned Standing Counsel merits consideration. The Tribunal awarded interest at 9% per annum. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mannat Johal’s case (supra) has held that the appropriate rate of interest in motor accident claim cases shall be 7.5% per annum. The interest awarded at 9% per annum is therefore liable to be reduced.

7. In the result, this appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award passed by the Tribunal is modified by reducing the rate of interest from 9% per annum to 7.5% per annum. The remaining terms and conditions regarding apportionment, deposit, and withdrawal shall remain unaltered. No order as to costs.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

________________________________ JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY Date: 28.11.2025 scs