##PAGE1##

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.972 of 2019

DATE:04.02.2026

Between:

Smt. Sunitha and three others.

…..Appellants

AND

Sri R. Muthyalu and another.

….Respondents

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,

1988 by the appellants/claimants challenging the judgment and

decree dated 03.01.2008 passed in O.P.No.637 of 2007 by the

learnedMotorr Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional Chief

Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as “the

Tribunal”), whereby the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of

Rs.6,00,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum, for the death of

one P. Mallesh (hereinafter referred as “the deceased”) in a motor

vehicle accident.

2

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 09.11.2006, the deceased

was proceeding in a Maruti Van bearing registration No.AP-29H-

8238towards Hyderabad and when the said vehicle reached near

Rangannaguda, a lorry bearing No.ADB-396, coming from the

opposite direction, dashed the Mahindra Bolero Van bearing

registration No. AP-7J-7855 and thereafter collided with the Maruti

Van of the deceased.As a result, the deceased sustained grievous

bleeding injuries and succumbed to the injuries.The

appellants/claimants filed the aforesaid claim petition before the

Tribunal, seeking compensation of Rs.6,00,000/-.

3. Before the Tribunal, Respondent No.1 remained ex parte.

Respondent No.2 filed a counter-affidavit denying that there was no

negligence on the part of the driver of the insured vehicle. It was

further denied that the driver did not possess a valid driving licence

and that there was a violation of the policy conditions; therefore, the

liability of Respondent No.2 stood ceased. It is further denied that the

compensation claimed is exorbitant and attributed negligence to the

driver of the Maruthi Van as well as the Mahindra Bolero.

4. The Tribunal, on appreciation of oral and documentary

evidence, held that the accident occurred due to the involvement of

the insured vehicle. While the Tribunal calculated the total

3

compensation to be Rs.8,20,455/-, it restricted the award to

Rs.6,00,000/- as per the original claim of the petitioners, with interest

at 7.5% per annum. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants/claimants

preferred the present appeal.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants contended that

the Tribunal erred in restricting the compensation. It is argued that

the Tribunal should have considered the Income Tax Returns (Ex.A6)

for the assessment year 2005-06 which showed a gross income of

Rs.1,18,440/-, rather than averaging the previous three years.

Furthermore, it is settled law that the Tribunal is empowered to award

"just compensation" even if it exceeds the amount claimed in the

petition.

6. No representation on behalf of the respondents.

7. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for

the appellants and upon a meticulous perusal of the record, this

Court finds that the primary issue for determination is whether the

Tribunal was justified in restricting the compensation to the amount

originally claimed despite its own factual assessment reaching a

higher figure. The record reveals that the deceased was 35 years old at

the time of the accident and was engaged in business. While the

Tribunal averaged the income over a three-year period, this Court

4

observes that the Income Tax Returns for the assessment year 2006-

07, marked as Ex.A6, clearly reflected a gross annual income of

Rs.1,18,440/-. In light of the principles established by the Hon’ble

Supreme Court, the latest available income proof prior to the death

should form the legitimate basis for calculating dependency, especially

for individuals whose income is documented through statutory filings.

Furthermore, it is a well-settled legal position, as articulated in

Nagappa v. Gurudayal Singh, (2003) 2 SCC 274, that there is no restriction on the

Tribunal or the Appellate Court to award compensatio