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.3358 of 2019 DATE: 12.02.2026 Between:

Cholamandalam M.S. General Insurance Co. Ltd., Represented by its Legal Manager, Office at 1-2-73/2, No.302, 3^rdFloor, SR Arcade, Parklane, Secunderabad - 500 003.

…..Appellant AND Archana Mishra and six others.

….Respondents

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellant/Insurance Company challenging the award dated 28.01.2019 passed in M.V.O.P.No.148 of 2018 by the learned Chairman, Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-XXVII Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad (for short “the Tribunal”), whereby the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.16,45,000/- with interest at 7.5%

per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.

2. Heard the submissions of learned counsel for both sides and perused the record.

3. The learned Standing Counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company vehemently argued that the Tribunal erred in fixing the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/- without there being any cogent evidence on record to prove the avocation and income of the deceased.It is further contended thatthe Tribunal failed to follow the settled principles of law while quantifying the compensation and that the award is excessive, requiring interference by this Court.

4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents/claimants contended that the deceased was aged about 45 years and was working as an electrical contractor earning Rs.20,000/- per month. It is argued that the Tribunal, after considering the facts and circumstances, fixed a reasonable income and the compensation awarded is just and proper.

5. As seen from the material placed on record, the accident occurred on 12.12.2016 at about 16.30 hours near Pudur Gate, Pudur, Ranga Reddy District, involving a Lorry bearing No. TS 12 UA 6628, which resulted in the instantaneous death of the deceased- Vijayanand Mishra. The police records under Exs.A1 to A7 and the evidence of eye-witness PW.2 clearly establish that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry driver. There is no dispute regarding the involvement of the vehicle or the insurance policy.

6. Sofaras as compensation is concerned, the Tribunal fixed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/-. However, taking into account the date of the accident and the lack of documentary evidence for the income, this Court is of the opinion that it is appropriate to fix the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.8,000/-. As per the age of the deceased, 25% is to be added towards future prospects, which comes to Rs.2,000/- (Rs.8,000/- x 25%), making the total monthly income Rs.10,000/-. The annual income comes to Rs.1,20,000/-. Since there are four dependents, 1/4^thof the income is to be deducted towards personal and living expenses of the deceased. Thus, the annual contribution of the deceased comes to Rs.90,000/- (Rs.1,20,000/- - Rs.30,000/-). By applying the appropriate multiplier of ‘14’ for the age group of 40-45 years, the loss of dependency is determined at Rs.12,60,000/- (Rs.90,000/- x 14). The amount of Rs.70,000/- granted towards conventional heads (Loss of estate: Rs.15,000/-, Loss of consortium: Rs.40,000/-, and Funeral expenses: Rs.15,000/-) can be maintained. Thus, the claimants are entitled for total compensation of Rs.13,30,000/- (Rs.12,60,000/- + Rs.70,000/-). 7. In the result, this appeal is partly allowed and compensation awarded by the Tribunal is reduced from Rs.16,45,000/- to Rs.13,30,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of realization. The remaining terms and conditions imposed by the Tribunal shall stand unaltered. No order as to costs.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

________________________________ JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY Date:12.02.2026 SCS