Andhra Pradesh high court
has increased compensation from Rs 3.85 lakh to Rs 7.74 lakh for the family of a security guard who died in a road accident, holding that his
future earning prospects
and compensation under conventional heads had not been properly considered.The high court allowed the appeal on October 1, 2026, directing the vehicle owner and
insurance company
to pay the enhanced compensation with 7.5 percent annual interest.Why did the family challenge the compensation awarded by the tribunal?According to the court order, Nagamuni Reddy died on January 2, 2009, when a tractor and harvester coming from the opposite direction hit him while he was going to agricultural land with his father. He was crushed under the vehicle and died on the spot. Yadiki police registered a case under Sections 338 and 304-A of the
Indian Penal Code
.The deceased was 21 years old and working as a security guard with G4S Security Services in Hyderabad. His family claimed that he was earning Rs 9,000 per month and sought Rs 6 lakh in compensation.The vehicle owner denied the manner of the accident, the deceased’s age and income, while the insurance company disputed his employment and income and questioned the insurance coverage and validity of the driver’s licence.The
Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Anantapur, held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the tractor and harvester. It awarded Rs 3,85,420 as compensation with 7.5 percent annual interest and costs, payable jointly and severally by the vehicle owner and insurance company.The family challenged the award, arguing that the deceased’s future earning prospects and compensation under conventional heads, including loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses, should also be considered.Why did the high court increase the compensation?Justice Alapati Giridhar noted that the deceased’s employer had established his monthly salary at Rs 4,238. The tribunal had accepted this income but had not added anything towards future prospects.The judge referred to the Supreme Court‘s ruling in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi, which provides for a 40 percent addition towards future prospects for a person below 40 years of age earning a fixed salary.“The Pranay Sethi case supra, at paragraph 61(iv), held that, for the below age of 40 years, who was on a fixed salary, an addition of 40 percent of the income should be considered for future prospects, in this case also, he was on a fixed salary, working in the Company for about two years, and his age was 21 years. Thus, the law on future prospects at 40 percent to be applied in this case, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the Claimants, which was also fairly conceded by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company,” the court said.The court also found that the tribunal had wrongly used the mother’s age to apply a multiplier of 12. It said the deceased’s age of 21 years should have been considered, for which the applicable multiplier was 18. Accordingly, it calculated the loss of dependency at Rs 6,40,764, against Rs 3,81,420 awarded by the tribunal.The judge also held that the deceased’s parents were entitled to compensation for loss of consortium, referring to the Supreme Court’s ruling in United India Insurance Company Limited v. Satinder Kaur. The court awarded Rs 48,000 each to the parents, Rs 18,000 towards loss of estate and Rs 18,000 towards funeral expenses. The Rs 2,000 awarded towards transportation charges was retained.The high court increased the total compensation to Rs 7,74,764 and allowed the appeal with costs of Rs 20,000. It directed that the amount carry 7.5 percent annual interest from the date of filing the claim petition until payment, subject to the family depositing additional court fees on the amount exceeding its original Rs 6 lakh claim within 30 days of receiving the judgment.
