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.3423 of 2019 DATE: 21.01.2026 Between:

Cholamandalam M.S.General Insurance Co. Ltd., Represented by its Manager …..Appellant AND Mothe Kistamma and four others.

….Respondents

JUDGMENT

This appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is filed by the appellant-insurance company, challenging the order and decree dated 17.05.2019 passed in M.V.O.P.No.429 of 2017 by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”), whereby the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.13,66,000/- together with interest @ 7.5% per annum in favour of the claimants-respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein, for the death of one Mothe Krishna (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”) in a motor vehicle accident.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 19.05.2017 at about 8.00 AM, the deceased was selling sweet ginger near Exit No.16 of the Thondupally toll gate. At that time, the driver of a lorry bearing No. HR 47 C 4281, driven in a rash and negligent manner at high speed, dashed the deceased. As a result, the deceased suffered a head injury and died instantaneously. A criminal case vide Crime No.194 of 2017 was registered on the file of the Shamshabad Police Station for the offence under Section 304-A of the IPC against the driver of the lorry. Stating that prior to the accident, the deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- per month and was the only earning member of the family, the claimants-respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein, being parents of the deceased, filed the aforesaid claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.20,00,000/-.

3. Before the Tribunal, respondent Nos.1 and 3 remained ex parte. The respondent No.2-insurance company/the appellant herein, filed counter opposing the petition, denying the manner of occurrence of the accident and rash and negligent driving. It was contended that the driver did not possess a valid driving licence and that the compensation sought was excessive.

4. The Tribunal, on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, including the testimony of the mother of the deceased (PW.1) and an eyewitness (PW.2), held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the crime vehicle. The Tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs.13,66,000/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition until realization, payable by the respondents therein jointly and severally. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed by the appellant-Insurance Company.

5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant- insurance company contended that the Tribunal erred in quantifying the compensation and erroneously fixed the deceased’s income at Rs.12,000/- per month. It is further contended that the income should be reduced to Rs.11,000/- per month to align with the principles of standardization of income for unskilled workers as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shaikh Sadik Shaikh Rafique v.

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd, 2025 INSC 673

6. There is no representation on behalf of respondents.

7. So far as assessment of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal observed that the deceased was a retail seller of sweet ginger near toll gates, acting in the nature of a hawker. While the claimants stated the deceased earned Rs.20,000/- per month, the Tribunal fixed the notional income at Rs.12,000/- per month. However, following the spirit of standardized income principles as per the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shaikh Sadik Shaikh Rafique’s case (supra) and the facts of the case, this Court finds merit in reducing the income. Given the year of the accident (2017) and the deceased's

avocation, the monthly income is reduced from Rs.12,000/- to Rs.11,000/-. Applying this revised income, the loss of dependency is recalculated. W