HONOURABLE JUSTICE M.G. PRIYADARSINI
M.A.C.M.A.Nos.1621 of 2019 and 56 of 2017
COMMON JUDGMENT:
These two appeals are being disposed of by this common
judgment since M.A.C.M.A.No.1621 of 2019 filed by the
claimant-injured and M.A.C.M.A.No.56 of 2017 filed by the
Insurance Company assailing the quantum of compensation,
are directed against the very same order and decree, dated
18.02.2016 made in M.V.O.P.No.2397 of 2012 on the file of the
Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-XXIV
Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short
"the Tribunal").
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter will be
referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the claimant filed a claim
petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
against the respondents claiming compensation of
Rs.5,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in the motor vehicle accident that occurred on 30.08.2012. According to him, on the fateful day, at 04:30 p.m., while he was waiting in 2 MGP, J Macma_1621_2019 and 56_2017 front of H.P.C.L. Aushapur, the crime vehicle i.e., Car bearing No.AP 09 T/C 55CM, owned by respondent No. 1 and insured with respondent No. 2, being driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner, dashed the claimant. Due to the accident, the claimant sustained closed fracture of both bones of left leg distal 1/3rd, blunt injury on chest with fracture of right scapula and other injuries all over the body. He was treated as inpatient at Spark Hospital, Feerzadiguda, Uppal, Hyderabad, from 30.08.2012 to 03.09.2012, where he also underwent surgery on 01.09.2012 for closed IL nailing of tibia. He incurred Rs.1,50,000/- towards medical treatment. Thus, the claimant laid the claim against the respondents for Rs.5.00 lakhs.
4. While the respondent No. 1 remained ex parte, Respondent No. 2 filed counter disputing the manner of accident, nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, age, avocation and income of the claimant and further contended that the claim is exorbitant and sought for dismissal of the claim petition.
5. Considering the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of 3 MGP, J Macma_1621_2019 and 56_2017 Rs.2,01,350/- towards compensation to the claimant along with costs and interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the petition till realization against the respondents jointly and severally.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-claimant and the learned Standing Counsel for the Insurance Company. Perused the material available on record.
7. The learned counsel for the claimant (appellant in MACMA No. 1621 of 201) has submitted that although the claimant, by way of evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 and Ex.A.10, disability certificate, established the fact that the claimant sustained disability due to the injuries received by him in the accident, the Tribunal did not take into consideration the same and discarded the evidence produced by the claimant and awarded very meager amount under various heads.
8. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of Insurance Company (appellant in MACMA No. 56 of 2017) sought to sustain the impugned award of the Tribunal contending that considering the manner of accident and the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, the learned 4 MGP, J Macma_1621_2019 and 56_2017 Tribunal has awarded reasonable compensation and the same needs no interference by this Court. Furthermore, he vehemently contended that even the driver of the Car was not holding any valid driving licence to drive the Car and since there was violation of terms of the policy, the respondent No. 1 alone is liable to pay the compensation and no liability can be fastened on the insurance company.
9. Admittedly, there is no dispute with regard to the manner of accident. The Tribunal after evaluating the evidence of PW.1 coupled with the documentary evidence available on record i.e. Exs.A.1 & A.2, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of Car bearing No.AP 09 T/C 55CM. Therefore, I see no reason to interfere with the finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending Car.
10. Coming to the aspect of quantum of compensation, as per the medical evidence available on record, the claimant sustained closed fracture of both bones of left leg distal 1/3rd, blunt injury on chest with fracture of right scapula and other injuries all over the body due to the said accident. Immediately after the 5 MGP, J Macma_1621_2019 and 56_2017 accident, he was shifted to Spark Hospital, Feerzadiguda, Uppal, Hyderabad, for treatment, where he was treated as inpatient from 30.08.2012 to 03.09.2012 and underwent surgery on 01.09.2012. For the said treatment, he spent Rs.1,50,000/- towards his treatment and medical expenses, Rs.3,000/- per month towards private attendant charges. Further, PW.3 deposed that the claimant has developed temporary disability in the form of limping for a period of four months and after that he recovered and engaged in daily activities. PW.2 also admitted that he is not a member of the medical board and that at the time of discharge from Spark Hospital, the claimant condition is stable and satisfactory. As such, Ex.A10, disability certificate issued by PW.2 showing partial and permanent disability of 30% cannot be taken into consideration in view of the admission of PW.2 as observed above. Moreover, the claimant filed Ex.A10, disability certificate issued by PW.2 showing the partial and permanent disability of 30% but the same was not considered by the Tribunal as PW.2, who is consultant surgeon at Doctors Hospital, Dilsukhnagar, deposed that he was not the member of Medical Board. PW.3, the Orthopedic Surgeon, Spark Hospitals, Hyderabad, deposed 6 MGP, J Macma_1621_2019 and 56_2017 that the claimant developed temporary disability in the form of limping for a period of four months and after that he recovered and engaged in normal daily activities. In the light of said evidence, the tribunal was right in not taking into consideration the disability pleaded by the claimant.
11. Insofar as other heads are concerned, according to the claimant, he was 23 years old and studying polytechnic diploma II year from Civil branch from Princeton College of Engineering and Technology, Ankushapur, Ghatkesar Mandal, Rangareddy District and lost his academic year due to the said accident. In order to prove his claim, he filed Exs.A8 & A9, certificates issued by Principal, Princeton College of Engineering and Technology. Considering the fact that the claimant is standby polytechnic diploma II year and suffered loss of academic year due to the accident, this Court is inclined to award Rs.50,000/- towards loss of one academic year. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant and in the light of evidence of P.W.4, billing manager of Spark Hospital, the tribunal rightly awarded an amount of Rs.71,350/- towards medical expenses and treatment and the same is not disturbed. That apart, the 7 MGP, J Macma_1621_2019 and 56_2017 claimant is entitled to Rs.70,000/- towards two grievous fractures, Rs.30,000/- towards future medical expenses, Rs.30,000/- towards pain and sufferings, Rs.20,000/- towards extra nourishment, transport and attendant charges. Thus, in all, the claimant is entitled to Rs.2,71,350/-.
12. With regard to the liability, the tribunal has rightly held that there is insurance coverage to the Car which covers the risk of the claimant and the insurance company is liable to pay compensation. Although it is pleaded that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding valid driving licence, the Insurance Company did not lead any evidence in this regard before the tribunal and therefore, the said plea, at this stage, cannot be entertained in the absence of any evidence let in by the Insurance Company.
13. In the result, while dismissing M.A.C.M.A.No.56 of 2017 filed by the insurance company, the M.A.C.M.A.No.1621 of 2019 filed by the claimant is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.2,01,350/- to Rs.2,71,350/-. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization, 8 MGP, J Macma_1621_2019 and 56_2017 payable by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 jointly and severally. Time to deposit the amount is one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the amount without furnishing any security. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_______________________________ JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI 22.02.2023 gms/rev 9 MGP, J Macma_1621_2019 and 56_2017 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE M.G. PRIYADARSINI M.A.C.M.A.Nos.1621 of 2019 and 56 of 2017 22.02.2023 gms/rev 10 MGP, J Macma_1621_2019 and 56_2017