HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI
M.A.C.M.A. No.40 of 2020
JUDGMENT:
This appeal is preferred by the petitioner being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-VIII Additional District Judge, Nizamabad in M.V.O.P. No.214 of 2015, dated 25.10.2019, seeking enhancement of compensation granted by the Tribunal.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties have been referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal.
3. Appellant is the petitioner in the main O.P. The injured- petitioner filed a petition under Section 166 (1) (a) of Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.5 lakhs for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 02.12.2014. It is stated by the claimant that on 2.12.2014 he along with his brother Kishan was going towards Metpally on his bullock cart to harvest sugar cane. His brother in law Ramdas was going ahead with his bullock cart and when they reached near Santosh Nagar village at about 5- 2
MGP, J MACMA.No.40 of 2020 15 a.m. in the meantime RTC bus bearing No. AP 25 Z 0074 came from the back side in a rash and negligent manner with high speed driven by its driver and dashed their bullock cart, as a result, petitioner sustained fracture injuries all over the body and the bullock cart was completely damaged and two bulls sustained severe injuries and became useless. Immediately after the accident, the petitioner was taken to Government Hospital, Armoor and from there he was shifted to Government Hospital, Nizamabad and was treated as inpatient from 2.12.2014 to 6.12.2014 and he was also treated in a private hospital and incurred huge amount towards medical expenses. It is further stated that prior to the accident, the petitioner is hale and healthy and aged 23 years and earning Rs.12,000/- per month by doing agriculture and labour works. Due to the accident, he lost his income and became disabled. Therefore, he is seeking compensation of Rs.5 lakhs against the respondent Nos.1 to 3, who are the owner, controlling authority and driver of the RTC bus jointly and severally.
3. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 filed counter disputing the manner of accident, nature of injuries sustained by the 3 MGP, J MACMA.No.40 of 2020 petitioner, age, avocation and income of the claimant and further contended that the said accident was occurred at about 5-15 a.m. and at the time of accident, the rider of the bullock cart and his brother were sleeping and the bulls are going on the road on their own and when the bus came near the bullock cart, the bulls got confused and started running, as such, the accident occurred and that the compensation claimed is excessive and exorbitant and sought for dismissal of the claim petition.
4. Respondent No.3 has also filed counter denying all the material averments and sought the petitioner to prove the age, avocation and income and also the manner of accident and sought for dismissal of the petition.
5. In order to prove their case, on behalf of the petitioner, he got himself examined as PW-1 and also examined PWs.2 to 4 and got marked Exs.A1 to A9. On behalf of the respondents, RW-1 was examined, however, no document was marked.
6. On considering the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of 4 MGP, J MACMA.No.40 of 2020 Rs.95,000/- towards compensation along with proportionate costs and interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit to the appellant-claimant against the respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severally.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-claimant and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Perused the material available on record.
8. The learned counsel for the appellant-claimant has submitted that although the claimant, by way of medical evidence i.e., Ex.A2 injury certificate, Ex.A9 case sheet and also by examining PW-2 who is the Civil Assistant Surgeon, Government Hospital, sufficiently established that the claimant has sustained grievous injuries and became disabled. However, the tribunal has not considered any disability and furthermore awarded meager amount towards compensation.
9. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2 sought to sustain the impugned award of the Tribunal contending that the tribunal after considering the manner of accident and the injuries sustained 5 MGP, J MACMA.No.40 of 2020 by the petitioner and the treatment taken by him, has awarded reasonable compensation and the same needs no interference by this Court.
10. With regard to the manner of accident, the Tribunal after evaluating the evidence of PW-1 coupled with Ex.A1 First Information Report and Ex.A4 charge sheet rightly held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of RTC bus bearing No.AP.25.Z.0074. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the said findings of the tribunal. Now the only dispute in the present appeal is with regard to the quantum of compensation.
11. As per the medical evidence available on record, the claimant has sustained fracture of right supera and infera pubic rami-undisplaced, 2) blunt injury to the lower back, 3) blunt injury over the scrotal injury and 4) minor abrasion present over left leg. Injuries 2 to 4 are simple in nature and injury No.1 is grievous in nature. PW-2 Civil Assistant Surgeon in Government Hospital deposed that the petitioner was treated as inpatient from 2.12.2014 and discharged on 6.12.2014 and Ex.A9 case sheet was issued by their hospital 6 MGP, J MACMA.No.40 of 2020 and Ex.A2 injury certificate was issued by Dr.Harikrishna. Though PW-2 was cross-examined at length nothing was elicited to disbelieve his evidence. Therefore, considering the said fact, the tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of earnings, Rs.5,000/- towards transportation charges, Rs.5,000/- towards medical expenses and extra nourishment, Rs.40,000/- towards damage of bullock cart and Rs.30,000/- towards pain and suffering, which appears to be very less. Therefore, this Court is inclined to enhance the same and awarded an amount of Rs.25,000/- for one grievous injury, Rs.30,000/- for three simple injuries @ Rs.10,000/- for each simple injury, Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.10,000/- towards transportation, attendant and extra nourishment, Rs.50,000/- towards bullock cart, Rs.15,000/- towards loss of earnings during the treatment period and Rs.10,000/- towards medical expenses. Thus in all the petitioner is awarded an amount of Rs.1,60,000/- under all counts.
13. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A. is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal 7 MGP, J MACMA.No.40 of 2020 from Rs.95,000/- to Rs.1,60,000/-. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization against the respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severally. The amount shall be deposited within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, he is entitled to withdraw the compensation amount without furnishing any security. No costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.
______________________ M.G.PRIYADARSINI,J 20.03.2023 pgp