HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY M.A.C.M.A.No.106 of 2019

JUDGMENT:

Being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in the judgment and decree dated 14.02.2018 passed in M.V.O.P. No.186 of 2014 by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Adilabad-cum-I Additional District Judge, Adilabad (for short “the Tribunal”),the appellants/claimants preferred the present appeal.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants, who are the wife and children of late Kurma @ Golla Rajamallu (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”) filed M.V.O.P.No.186 of 2014 before the Tribunal, under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- with interest @ 18% per annum for the loss sustained by them due to the untimely death of the deceased in motor vehicle accident.It is stated that the deceased was aged about 55 years and was hale and healthy and was earning Rs.6,000/- by way doing agriculture field work. It is further stated that on 17.05.2013 at about 8.30 a.m., while the deceased was proceeding on the road near Eidgaon X-road of Nirmal Town to go to his house, a motorcycle bearing No.AP-01- AG-2358 being driven in a rash and negligent manner and high speed by its rider i.e., respondent No.1 dashed the deceased from opposite direction due to which, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to injuries on 22.06.2013 while undergoing treatment. Before the Tribunal, respondent No.1 remained ex parte and respondent No.2 i.e., Insurance Company filed counter denying the averments of the claim petition and contended that the amount claimed is excessive and prayed to dismiss the claim petition.

3. Considering the claim of the appellants and the counter filed by respondent No.2, and on evaluation of both oral and documentary evidence, the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the O.P. and awarded compensation of Rs.4,99,320/- along with an interest thereon at 9% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of the realization payable by the respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally. Challenging the same, the present appeal has been filed by the appellants seeking enhancement of the compensation.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. Learned Counsel for the appellants would submit that compensation granted by the Tribunal is meager and prayed to enhance the same. It is further submitted that as per the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others¹, the appellants are also entitled to the future prospects and also Rs.84,000/- (Rs.70,000/- + 10% enhancement for every three years) under conventional heads.

6. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2would submit that the compensation has been rightly granted by the Tribunal and the same need not be enhanced.

7. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent riding of the offending motorcycle and that respondents 1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the appellants has become final, as the same is not challenged by the respondents.

8. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned, even though the appellants claimed that the deceased was earning Rs.6,000/- per month and the evidence shows that the deceased was an able-bodied male engaged incoolie work, the Tribunal has determined the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- per month. However, having regard to the evidence on record and the prevailing rate for rural agricultural/coolie labour at the relevant time, this Court is satisfied that a notional monthly income of Rs.5,000/- is reasonable and proper to be adopted in place of the

2017 ACJ 2700

Rs.3000/- taken by the Tribunal. Thus, the notional annual income of the deceased comes to Rs.60,000/- (Rs.5,000 x 12). Further, the appellants are entitled to addition of 40% towards future prospects, as per the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court