Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
GARLAPATI KUTUMBA RAO, GUNTUR. & ANO. vs J&R SUDHEEN @ SUDHEER, KARNATAKA STATE. & 3 ANO.
BENCH – THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO
M.A.C.M.A. No. 994 of 2009
DATE OF JUDGEMENT – 10 MAY 2023
The petitioners are the parents of the deceased. On 01/02.10.2004, the deceased was travelling in the Maxi Tempo bearing from Bangalore to go to Hasan. On the way, at about 2.00 a.m. when the vehicle reached near Hombalakoppa Gate, NH-48 BM road, the driver of the lorry bearing drove the same in a rash and negligent manner in high speed and dashed the tempo and thendashed another Maruti car. In that accident, the deceased G.Narasimharao and one Srinivas sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot.
The respondents 1(J&R SUDHEEN @ SUDHEER, KARNATAKA STATE), 2(The Divisional Manager) and 4(The Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd.) filed written statements and denied the allegations made by the claim petitioners in the petition and pleaded that the claim petitioners are not entitled to any compensation.
As per salary certificate of the deceased, the deceased was drawing salary of Rs.33,750/- per month as on 01.10.2004 at the designation of R&D Engineer. After excluding Public Provident Fund, the income of the deceased was Rs.31,950/-. The conveyance allowance of Rs.800/-, telephone allowance of 1500/- and special allowance of Rs.8,650/- cannot be included in the income of the deceased and the same cannot be considered as a pay of the deceased. Therefore, from out of Rs.31,950/- an amount of Rs.10,950/- has to be deducted, therefore, monthly income of the deceased is arrived at Rs.21,000/- and his annual income was Rs.2,52,000/-. As per the case of the petitioners, the deceased was aged about 25 years by the date of the accident. As per the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay- Sethi1, 40% of the income has to be added since the deceased was not a government employee i.e., Rs.2,52,000/- + Rs.1,00,800/- = Rs.3,52,800/-.
Since the deceased was a bachelor, 50% of income from out of the annual income has to be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased. As such after deducting 50% of the income towards personal expenses of the deceased, the annual contribution to the family is arrived at Rs.1,76,400 (Rs.3,52,800/- – Rs.1,76,400/-). The material on record shows that the deceased was aged about 25 years at the time of accident. So the relevant multiplier applicable to the age group of the deceased is ’18’, as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Varma Vs. DelhiTransport Corporation and the loss of dependency comes to Rs.31,75,200/- (Rs.1,76,400/- x 18) and an amount of Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards funeral expenses of the deceased and amount of Rs.60,000/- is awarded towards loss of estate. In total an amount of Rs 32,45,200/- is awarded towards total compensation to the claimants.
The court held that this appeal is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation granted by the Tribunal. The claimants are entitled to an amount of, Rs.32,45,200/- towards total compensation with interest thereon @7.5% p.a. The respondents 1 and 2 are directed to deposit the remaining compensation amount within two months from the date of this judgment. On such deposit, the claimant No.1, father of the deceased is entitled to withdraw an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- and claimant No.2, mother of the deceased is entitled to withdraw an amount of Rs.22,45,200/- along with total costs and interest thereon.
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY HARSHIT JAIN
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”