1 RRN,J
MACMA No.103 of 2014
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
M.A.C.M.A.No.103 OF 2014
JUDGMENT:
This MACMA is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking enhancement of compensation, aggrieved by the order and decree dt.26.11.2013 passed in M.V.O.P.No.747 of 2012 by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional District Judge, Warangal, (for short "the Tribunal").
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be hereinafter referred to as they are arrayed before the Court below.
3. Brief facts of the case are that on 18.01.2012 at about 16.00 hours while the petitioner was proceeding on a motorcycle bearing No. AP-9-BV-0853 along with his relative to Khanpur Village and while they were on their return journey to Hyderabad, a Tata Sumo bearing No.AP36-H-5235 being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and at high speed, came in opposite direction and dashed the motorcycle of the petitioner, due to which, the petitioner and his relative fell down and sustained grievous injuries.
2 RRN,J
MACMA No.103 of 2014
Therefore to cover the loss incurred, he laid the claim against the respondents seeking compensation of Rs.6,00,000/-.
4. The 1st respondent remained ex-parte and the 2nd respondent filed counter denying the petition allegations, and contended that the accident occurred as a result of the rash and negligent driving of the petitioner.
5. The petitioner to prove his case, examined PWs.1 and 2 and got marked Exs.A1 to A9 and Ex.X-1. On behalf of respondent No.2, no oral evidence was adduced but Ex.B-1 was marked.
6. After considering the evidence available on record, the Tribunal allowed the claim petition in part by granting Rs.70,502/- to the petitioner towards compensation. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation, the present appeal.
7. Heard both sides and perused the record.
8. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the Tribunal erred in awarding meagre compensation without considering the injuries sustained by the petitioner, the evidence of PW2, the loss of earning capacity due to permanent partial disability and future medical expenses. He further contended that the income 3 RRN,J MACMA No.103 of 2014 of the petitioner is to be taken on the lower side and compensation awarded under various heads is meagre and prayed to enhance the same by allowing the appeal.
9. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent would contend that the Tribunal was justified in passing the impugned award even in the absence of the income proof of the petitioner and also awarded a sufficient amount. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the appeal.
10. The Tribunal fixed the notional income of the petitioner at Rs.3,000/- per month in the absence of income proof. However, this Court is inclined to fix the notional income of the petitioner at Rs.4,500/- p.m. in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ramchandrappa vs Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd.1. The contention of the petitioner that he suffered permanent partial disablement is rejected as the evidence of PW-2 clearly reveals that the petitioner can do his original work as usual. As such, this Court is of the opinion that the Tribunal was justified in not awarding compensation under the head of disability/loss of future earning capacity including the fact that no 1( 2011 ) 13 SCC 236 4 RRN,J MACMA No.103 of 2014 disability certificate is filed. Thus the loss of earnings could be calculated for two months i.e Rs.4,500/- x 2 = Rs.9,000/- instead of Rs.6,000/-. Despite PW-2 deposing that the petitioner would incur about Rs.70,000/- to Rs.80,000/- towards future operation, the Tribunal did not award any amount and this Court is inclined to award Rs.50,000/- for the same.
11. The petitioner was awarded Rs.70,502/- towards compensation and the same is dealt with by this Court in the following manner:
Head Amount arrived at by Amount arrived at by the Tribunal this Court Injuries Nil Rs.20,000/-
Medical bills Rs.52,502/- Rs.52,502/-
Extra nourishment Nil Rs.5,000/-
Future operation Nil Rs. 50,000/-
Loss of earnings Rs.6,000/- Rs.9,000/-
Pain and suffering Rs.10,000/- Rs. 20,000/-
Transportation Rs.2,000/- Rs. 3,000/-
Attendant charges Nil Rs.3,000/-
Total Rs.70,502/- Rs.1,62,502/-
5 RRN,J
MACMA No.103 of 2014
12. Accordingly, the M.A.C.M.A. is allowed in part by enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.70,502/- to Rs.1,62,502/- (One Lakh, Sixty Two thousand, Five hundred and Two Rupees only) with interest of 7.5% from the date of petition till the date of realization. The respondents shall deposit the said compensation amount together with interest and costs after giving due credit to the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Upon such deposit, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the entire amount. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_____________________________________ NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, J 16th day of March, 2023 BDR