SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 58855

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
United India Insurance Co.Ltd – Appellant
Versus
B. Hanumantha Reddy – Respondent
MACMA 309/2019



##PAGE1##

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.309of 2019

DATE: 23.12.2025

Between:

United India Insurance Company Limited.

….. Appellant/Respondent No.3

AND

Sri B. Hanumantha Reddy and five others.

….Respondents

JUDGMENT:

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

1988, is filed by the appellant-Insurance Company, challenging the

award dated 16.10.2018 passed in M.V.O.P.No.293 of 2016 by the

Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-XII Additional Chief

Judge, City Civil Court at Secunderabad (hereinafter referred to as

“the Tribunal”), whereby the Tribunal awarded compensation of

Rs.6,93,750/- together with interest @ 9% per annum to be

payable by the driver, owner and insurance company jointly and

severally for the death of one Ramulamma (hereinafter referred to

as “the deceased”) in a motor vehicle accident.

##PAGE2##

2

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 25.01.2016 at about

8:00 p.m., the deceased Ramulammawas proceeding as a pillion

rider on a motorcycle bearing No.AP-25-8245, along with her two

sons and when they reached NH-65 near IIT, Kandi Village, Medak

District, the motorcycle allegedly collided with the rear side of a

stationary lorry bearing No.AP-25X-2439, which was loaded with

sugarcane and parked without any indication, parking lights or

precautions. As a result of the collision, the deceased and her sons

sustained injuries and were shifted first to Government Hospital,

Sangareddy and later to Gandhi Hospital, Secunderabad,

where Ramulamma succumbed to her injuries on 26.01.2016. The

Police, Sanga Reddy Police Station, also registered a case in Crime

No.28 of 2016 for the offences under Sections 304-A and 338 of

IPC against the driver of the lorry. The claimants, being husband

and children of the deceased,filed the aforesaid claim petition

before the Tribunalclaiming compensation of Rs.9,00,000/-.

3. The Tribunal, on appreciation of the oral and documentary

evidence, held that the accident was caused due to negligent

parking of the lorry; there was contributory negligence on the part

of the motorcycle rider by way of triple riding, which was fixed

at 25% and awarded the claimants a total compensation

of Rs.6,93,750/- with 9% interest per annum from the date of filing

##PAGE3##

3

petition till realisation, holding all respondents jointly and severally

liable.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company

vehemently contended that the Tribunal erred in attributing

only 25% contributory negligence to the rider of the motorcycle and

fixing the liability of the lorry driver at 75%, despite admitted triple

riding and contributory negligence on the part of the deceased’s

rider; the income of the deceased (housewife) was wrongly taken

at Rs.6,000/- per month and additional 25% for future

prospectswas erroneously added since it was a notional income;

the Tribunal erred in awarding interest at 9% per annum;

and the overall award of Rs.6,93,750/- was excessive and

unreasonable.

5. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the

appellant and perused the record.

6. So far as contributory negligence is concerned, the Tribunal

found that the accident occurred on 25.01.2016 when the

deceased (as pillion rider on a motorcycle with two others) collided

with the rear side of a parked lorry bearing No.AP-25X-2439, which

had no parking lights or precautions. The driver of the lorry

remained ex parte and the appellant-insurance company admitted

the policy was in force. Therefore, this Court finds that the

##PAGE4##

4

Tribunal rightly concluded that the negligent parking of the lorry

was the proximate cause and that triple riding was contributory,

which justified attributing 25% contributory negligence to the

rider.

7. With respect to the income of the deceased, the Tribunal

thoroughly examined the material on record and rightly treated the

deceased as a housewifewith notional income for the purpose of

computing loss of dependency. Since the evidence did not

substantiate a regular earn

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top