THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.SANTHOSH REDDY
M.A.C.M.A.No.2047 OF 2016
JUDGMENT:
This appeal is directed against the award dated 26.12.2015 in M.V.O.P.No.1241 of 2009, on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-VIII Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar (for short 'the Tribunal), wherein the said claim application filed by appellant herein seeking compensation was allowed-in-part, awarding Rs.1,16,870/- with interest at 6.5% per annum from the date of petition.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the 2nd respondent-insurer. None appears for the 1st respondent- owner of Qualis vehicle. Perused the material on record.
3. The appellant herein filed claim application seeking compensation of Rs.3,50,000/- on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 21.10.2009 at about 11:30 p.m., near Bharath Gas, Uppal-Boduppal road, Ranga Reddy District. According to the claimant, on that day, he was proceeding towards Uppal depot from Ramanthapur on his 2 TVS XI vehicle bearing No.AP 15 6817 and at that time, one Qualis vehicle bearing No.AP 29 TA 5226 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner came in the same direction and dashed his two wheeler from rear side. As a result of which, the claimant sustained fracture to his right leg and immediately he was shifted to SHK Hospital, Uppal for treatment. Police, Uppal registered a case in Cr.No.10 of 1996 for the offences punishable under Sections 337 & 338 IPC against the driver of the Qualis vehicle. According to the claimant, he was aged 40 years at the time of accident and was hale and healthy earning Rs.10,000/- per month by doing rice business. The claimant spent huge amounts for treatment in a private hospital and due to the accident, he suffered permanent disability and unable to walk or drive and lost his earnings.
4. Respondent No.1-owner of the Qualis vehicle remained ex parte. Respondent No.2-insurer 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 3 negligent driving of the Qualis vehicle by its driver. The said finding had become final, as no appeal is preferred by the respondents questioning the same. The Tribunal further held that the claimants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.1,16,870/-. Accordingly, an award was passed for the said amount with interest at 6.5% per annum. Not satisfied with the same, the claimant filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
6. The only question that arises for consideration in the present appeal is - whether the claimant is entitled for enhancement of compensation, and if so to what extent?
7. According to the claimant, he was doing rice business, earning Rs.10,000/- per month. The claimant received fracture injuries on Tibia in the accident which are grievous in nature. As per Ex.A-3 injury certificate issued by the Medical Officer in Shree Hrishikeshaya Hospital, Uppal, Hyderabad, he received fracture injury to right lateral condoyle. A-6 is the discharge summary issued by the said hospital mentioning the above injury. Ex.A-4 is the x-ray film.
4
8. P.W.2, Dr.B.Bixapathi, the doctor who issued disability certificate Ex.P-7, in his evidence stated that he examined the claimant and found post plating for fracture lateral condyle of right tibia along with stiffness of right knee joint and the disability was found to be 50% which is permanent and partial in nature. He further stated that as a result of the disability, the claimant cannot carry weights and cannot ride bicycle. P.W.3, Dr.W.T.S.Chary, the Medical Officer in Shree Hrishikeshaya Hospital, Uppal, in his evidence stated that the claimant was treated in their hospital. He also deposed that the claimant was admitted on 22.10.2009 and underwent surgical correction of long bone fracture right tibia on 26.10.2009 and was discharged on 31.10.2009. Exs.A-3 medical certificate, Ex.A-4 x-ray film and Ex.A-6 discharge summary were issued by their hospital. The evidence of P.Ws.2 and 3 coupled with the documents Exs.A-3, A-4 and A-6 categorically proves that the claimant suffered fracture injuries and also 50% permanent and partial disability.
5
9. The Tribunal had awarded an amount of Rs.30,000/- as compensation towards loss of future earnings instead of making the assessment of compensation by taking into consideration the future loss of earnings depending on the monthly income of the claimant. As per Ex.A-3 medical certificate, the claimant was aged 44 years and was doing agriculture and earning Rs.10,000/- per month. However, there is no oral or documentary evidence in proof of the said monthly income of the claimant. After taking into consideration the age of the claimant and as he was hale and healthy prior to the accident, his income can reasonably be fixed at Rs.4,000/- per month. As per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in PAPPU DEO YADAV v. NARESH KUMAR AND OTHERS1, the claimant is entitled for additional 40% on the income towards future prospects, as he was aged 44 years at the time of accident. If the same is applied, the income of the claimant comes to Rs.5,600/- per month (Rs.4,000/- + Rs.1,600/-) and it comes to Rs.67,200/- per annum. The claimant suffered 50% permanent and partial disability as per Ex.A-7 disability certificate. If the same is calculated, the loss of earnings due to the 1 AIR 2020 SC 4424 6 disability would be Rs.33,600/- per annum (Rs.67,200 x 50%). The appropriate multiplier applicable to the age of the deceased who was 44 years at the time of accident would be '14'. Applying the same, the loss of earnings would come to Rs.4,70,400/- (Rs.33,600/- x 14). Keeping in view the multiple fracture injuries sustained by the claimant, an amount of Rs.25,000/- is awarded towards pain and suffering, Rs.5,000/- towards transportation charges, Rs.10,000/- towards extra nourishment and an amount of Rs.870/- is awarded towards medical bills. Thus, in all, the claimant is awarded a total compensation of Rs.5,11,270/- (Rs.4,70,400/- + Rs.25,000/- + Rs.5,000/- + Rs.10,000/- + Rs.870/-). The compensation awarded by the Tribunal under different heads is set aside. The interest awarded by the Tribunal at 6.5% per annum is considered to be on the lower side. In view of the prevailing market rate of interest at that point of time, it is considered that awarding interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition would be just and reasonable.
10. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The award of the Tribunal is modified by enhancing the compensation from 7 Rs.1,16,870/- to Rs.5,11,270/- with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till realization, payable by respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally. The claimant shall pay the deficit court fee on the enhanced compensation. There shall be no order as to costs.
11. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed.
_______________________ A.SANTHOSH REDDY, J 19.10.2022 Lrkm