THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G. PRIYADARSINI
M.A.C.M.A.No.484 of 2017
JUDGMENT:
This appeal is preferred by the Road Transport Corporation, questioning the order and decree, dated 17.05.2016 made in M.V.O.P.No.281 of 2014 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional District Judge, Karimnagar (for short, "the Tribunal").
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will hereinafter be referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.10.00 lakhs towards compensation for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 18.01.2022. According to the claimant, on 18.01.2012, while the claimant, along with one Kudire Lachaiah, was going to Peddapalli on a motorcycle and when they reached near S.R.R. Fire Works Godown, Appannapet Village on Rajiv Rahadari, one R.T.C. bus bearing No.AP 21 Z 0028 of Thorroor Depot, being driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner at high speed and dashed the motorcycle of the claimant from opposite direction, due to which the claimant sustained closed fracture of shaft of right femur, 2 MGP, J Macma_484 of 2017 compound comminuted segmental fracture of right tibia middle and lower 1/3rd, fracture of right fibula lower end, skill loss on anterior and the lateral aspect of the right lower leg and deep abrasion on shine of right tibia. Immediately after the accident, the claimant was shifted to Government Hospital, Peddapalli and from there to Apollo Reach Hospital, Karimnagar and from there to Chelmeda Ananda Rao Hospital, Bommakal, where he took treatment as inpatient and underwent surgery for the fracture injuries by inserting implants. It is also stated that few days thereafter, the claimant developed infection in the legs for which he was admitted as inpatient in Icon Hospital, Kukatpally, Hyderabad, where he took treatment for three months and skin grafting was done to the loss of muscles. As there was no re-union of bones, the claimant was developed with infection, for which he was again admitted as inpatient in Omega Hospital, Hyderabad and took treatment for three months, where bone grafting was done and in total he was under treatment for a period of one year and he spent Rs.6,00,000/- for his treatment in various hospitals. According to him, due to the accident, he was unable to attend his regular works as he sustained permanent disability at 75% and therefore, he filed the claim petition against the respondents seeking compensation under different heads. 3
MGP, J Macma_484 of 2017
4. The Tribunal, considering the claim and the counter filed by the R.T.C., and on evaluation of the evidence, both oral and documentary, has partly allowed the O.P. awarding compensation of Rs.6,51,564/- with interest at 7.5% per annum payable by respondent Nos.1 and 2. Challenging the same, the present appeal has been filed by the R.T.C.
5. Heard both sides and perused the material available on record.
6. A perusal of the impugned order discloses that the Tribunal having framed issue No.1 as to whether the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the R.T.C. Bus by its driver, duly considering the evidence of P.W.1, injured, coupled with the documentary evidence i.e. Ex.A1, F.I.R. and Ex.A2, charge sheet, has categorically observed that the accident has occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the R.T.C. bus and has answered the issue in favour of the claimant and against the respondents. 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 R.T.C. bus.
4
MGP, J Macma_484 of 2017
7. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned, as per Ex.A5, Medico Legal Record, the claimant has sustained four grievous injuries and one simple injury i.e., closed fracture of shaft of right femur, compound comminuted segmental fracture of right tibia middle and lower 1/3rd, fracture of right fibula lower end, skill loss on anterior and the lateral aspect of the right lower leg and deep abrasion on shine of right tibia, which was corroborated by the oral evidence of P.W.3. The record further reveals that the claimant has taken treatment in various hospitals for a considerable period. Taking into consideration all the aspects i.e., the injuries sustained by the claimant, nature and period of treatment undergone by him in various hospitals, medical expenses incurred by the claimant, loss of earnings sustained by him during the treatment period and also for disability sustained by him, pain and suffering, mental agony, transportation and extra, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.6,51,564/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum, which appears to be just and reasonable. Therefore, I see no reason to interfere with the order of the Tribunal and the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
8. Accordingly, the M.A.C.M.A. is dismissed confirming the order and decree, dated 17.05.2016 made in M.V.O.P.No.281 of 5 MGP, J Macma_484 of 2017 2014 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional District Judge, Karimnagar. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_______________________________ JUSTICE M.G. PRIYADARSINI 13.03.2023 gkv 6 MGP, J Macma_484 of 2017 34 THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G. PRIYADARSINI M.A.C.M.A. No.484 of 2017 DATE: 13.03.2023 gkv