THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA M.A.C.M.A.No.226 of 2023

JUDGMENT:

Heard Sri A.Ramakrishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant. Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

2. This appeal is preferred by the appellant – Insurance Company, challenging the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- IV Additional District Judge, Nizamabad in M.V.O.P.No.202 of 2017, dated 04.11.2022, whereby an amount of Rs.16,97,600/- with interest at 7.5% per annum was awarded to the petitioner Nos.1 to 4 therein. There is no dispute with respect to the occurrence of the accident and the liability to pay compensation by the driver, owner, and insurer of the offending vehicle.

3. In the grounds of appeal, the appellant has challenged the award on two grounds: first, the fixation of the monthly income at Rs.7,000/- by the Tribunal in the absence of any evidence; and second, the deduction of only 1/4^th towards personal expenses on the pretext that there were four 4. Coming to the first ground regarding the quantum of compensation, the learned counsel for the appellant contended that the Tribunal ought to have taken the income of the deceased as Rs.4,500/- per month, based on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited¹. However, the Tribunal took the income as Rs.7,000/- per month, which is stated to be excessive. On this aspect, in view of the subsequent developments regarding assessment of monthly income in the absence of any evidence, the quantum of Rs.4,500/- per month is no longer considered good law. Furthermore, incremental additions to the monthly income of the deceased were expected to be made in addition to Rs.4,500/- per month for each successive year. As such, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the monthly income of the deceased as fixed by the Tribunal at Rs.7,000/- per month.

5. The next ground for challenging the awarded amount pertains to the Tribunal deducting only 1/4th towards the personal expenses of the deceased, on the ground that his parents and siblings, four in total, were judgment of Sarla Verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation

6. Accordingly, taking the monthly income at Rs.7,000/-, and adding 40% towards future prospects, as the deceased was 25 years old at the time of the accident, the monthly notional income comes to Rs.9,800/-. After deducting 50% towards personal expenses, the contribution to the family would be Rs.4,900/- per month. Applying the multiplier of 18 (based on the age of 25 years), the loss of source of income amounts to Rs.10,58,400/- (Rs.4,900 x 12 x 18). In addition, respondents are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each towards parental and filial consortium. They are also entitled to Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses. 7. Accordingly, the award of the Tribunal is modified awarding compensation of Rs.12,48,400/-.

8. In the result, this Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this appeal, shall stand closed.

_____________________

RENUKA YARA, J Date: 31.07.2025 sa