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.537 of 2019 DATE: 20.01.2026 Between:

Smt. Ji Anita and two others …..Appellants AND Telangana State Road Transport Corporation, Represented by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director, Bus Bhavan, RTC X Road, Musheerabad, Hyderabad and another ….Respondents

JUDGMENT:

This appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is filed by the appellants–claimants being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order and decree dated 23.01.2019 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Hyderabad-cum- Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short, “the Tribunal”) in M.V.O.P.No.1756 of 2017, whereby the Tribunal granted compensation of Rs.6,82,600/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization, for the death of late GI. Larvin @ Lawrence (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”).

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 07.05.2017, at about 3:00 PM, when the deceased was proceeding on his motorcycle from Rahmathnagar towards Yousufguda to bring lunch for himself and his cousin and reached near Janakamma Thota, one TSRTC bus bearing No.AP 11 Z 4265, driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver, overtook and collided with the deceased’s motorcycle, causing him to fall on the road. The bus then ran over the deceased, resulting in his instantaneous death. The Police, Jubilee Hills Police Station, registered Crime No.305 of 2017 under Section 304-A IPC against the driver of the TSRTC bus. Stating that the deceased was employed as a security guard with Blue Shield Security Agency and was earning Rs.15,000/- per month at the time of his death, the appellants-claimants, being the parents and brother of the deceased, filed the aforesaid claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- for the death of the deceased in the said accident.

3. Before the Tribunal, the respondents i.e., Telangana State Road Transport Corporation, through its Vice Chairman & Managing Director and Depot Manager, contested the claim, denying the material allegations including negligence of their driver, involvement of the offending vehicle, and the deceased’s occupation and income.

They also contended that the claim was excessive and thus prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.

4. The Tribunal, after considering oral and documentary evidence, held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the TSRTC bus and awarded a total compensation of Rs.6,82,600/- along with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization of the amount. Being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation, the appellants-claimants filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants vehemently contended that even though the deceased was working as a security guard at the time of the accident and was earning a monthly income of not less than Rs.15,000/-, the Tribunal erred in arbitrarily fixing his income at Rs.4,500/- per month; that the Tribunal ought to have considered the documents filed by them and ought to have taken a reasonable notional income based on the available evidence and market standards; that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is wholly inadequate and unjust; and that the appellants-claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation based on a realistic assessment of the deceased’s income, with appropriate addition for future prospects and other conventional heads.

6. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents argued that the appellants’ claim for compensation is excessive and exorbitant; that the appellants failed to provide reliable proof regarding the deceased’s income and employment; and as such the Tribunal’s award does not require any interference.

7. So far as negligence and liability are concerned, the Tribunal’s finding on rash and negligent dr