THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.SANTHOSH REDDY
M.A.C.M.A.No.1866 OF 2018
JUDGMENT:
This appeal is directed against the award dated 19.02.2018 in M.V.O.P.No.1240 of 2015, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short 'the Tribunal), wherein the said claim application filed by respondent herein seeking compensation was allowed-in-part, awarding Rs.90,400/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants-APSRTC and the learned counsel for the respondent-claimant. Perused the record.
3. The respondent herein filed claim application seeking compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 30.05.2015. According to the claimant, on that day, the claimant was travelling in an auto bearing No.AP 28 TE 4968 from Choudarpally towards Kothapet Market, Hyderabad with load of mangoes along with his 2 wife and when they reached near Choudarpally gate, at that time, one APSRTC bus bearing No.AP 29 Z 0962 came in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and lost control over the vehicle and dashed the auto of the claimant from rear side. As a result, the claimant and two others sustained fracture injuries. The claimant was shifted to Delta Hospital, Hastinapuram and took treatment as inpatient. Police, Yacharam registered a case in Cr.No.105 of 2015 against the driver of the RTC bus. According to the claimant, he spent Rs.80,000/- towards medical expenses.
4. The appellants-APSRTC filed counter opposing the claim and denying their liability to pay the compensation.
5. On a consideration of the evidence available on record, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the APSRTC bus by its driver. The Tribunal further held that the claimant was entitled for a total compensation of Rs.90,400/-. Aggrieved by the same, the insurer filed the present appeal.
3
6. The main contention of learned counsel for the appellants is that driver of the auto was not having a valid driving licence and, therefore, there has been violation of the terms and conditions of the policy and, hence, the appellant-APSRTC is not liable to pay the compensation. He would further contend that the Tribunal had awarded the compensation without there being any proper evidence
7. As seen from the impugned order, the Tribunal on the basis of the evidence of respondent herein and the documents in Exs.A-1 and A-2 held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the APRTC bus by its driver resulting in the respondent sustaining injuries. The appellants have not adduced any evidence rebutting the said evidence. Further, the Tribunal had considered Ex.A-3 discharge summary wherein the claimant sustained head injury and multiple abrasions over lower and upper limb and was hospitalized and took treatment for period of seven days and awarded an amount of Rs.30,000/- for the injuries and Rs.48,000/- towards hospitalization expenses and Rs.2,450/- towards medical bills i.e., an amount of Rs.50,450/- (Rs.48,000/- + Rs.2,450/-) and Rs.5,000/- towards pain and suffering and 4 Rs.5,000/- towards for transportation and extra nourishment, thus making up a total compensation of Rs.90,450/- (rounded off to Rs.90,400/-).
8. In the circumstances, I am of the view that the Tribunal had awarded a total compensation Rs.90,400/- to the claimant after taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence available on record and the said compensation is just and reasonable and the impugned award is not liable to be interfered with.
9. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
10. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed.
_______________________ A.SANTHOSH REDDY, J 11.10.2022 Lrkm