THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G. PRIYADARSINI
M.A.C.M.A.No. 65 of 2017
JUDGMENT:
This appeal is preferred by the injured questioning the order and decree, dated 14.09.2016 passed in M.V.O.P.No.766 of 2012 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-VIII Additional District Judge, Nizamabad (for short, the Tribunal).
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties have been 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.3,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 03.02.2012. It is stated that on the fateful day, the claimant, along with some others, was travelling from Nizamabad to Amrad in the auto bearing No. AP 25 X 1409, owned by respondent No. 1, insured with respondent No. 2 and when he reached near Sukhjit factory, one unknown vehicle came from opposite direction being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner at high speed, dashed the auto, as a result of which, the claimant sustained fracture of both bones of right leg, fracture of ribs and 2 MGP, J Macma_65_2017 injuries to chest, both hands, leg and other injuries all over the body. Immediately, he was taken to Amrutha Laxmi Hospital, Nizamabad, wherein he was treated as inpatient from 03.02.2012 to 09.02.2012 and underwent surgery on 08.02.2012. He spent Rs.60,000/- towards nursing and nourishing. According to the claimant, he was hale and healthy, aged 32 years as on the date of accident and earning Rs.15,000/- per month by doing agriculture. Due to the said injuries, he sustained permanent disability and lost his future earnings. Thus, he laid the claim seeking compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- against the respondents.
4. Before the Tribunal, while respondent No. 1 set ex parte, the respondent No. 2 filed counter denying petition averments, disputing the manner of accident, nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, avocation and income of the claimant and further contended that the claim as made is exorbitant and sought for dismissal of the claim petition.
5. Based on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues:
1. Whether the pleaded accident occurred resulting in injuries sustained by the claiamant, Koutham Anjaiah alias Anjaneyulu, due to rash and negligent driving of auto 3 MGP, J Macma_65_2017 rickshaw bearing No. AP 25 X 1409 by its driver?
2. Whether the claimant is entitled to claim compensation, if so, to what quantum and from which of the respondents?
3. To what relief?
6. In order to prove the issues, PWs.1 & 2 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.9 and C.1 were marked on behalf of the claimant. On behalf of respondents, RW.1 was examined and Ex.B.1 was marked.
7. Considering the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal has partly allowed the O.P. and awarded an amount of Rs.54,000/- towards compensation to the claimant along with proportionate costs and interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of payment or realization against the respondents jointly and severally.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-claimant and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.2- Insurance Company. Perused the material available on record.
9. The learned counsel for the appellant-claimant has submitted that although the claimant, by way of medical evidence i.e. the evidence of P.W.2, doctor, orthopedic surgeon 4 MGP, J Macma_65_2017 in Amrutha Laxmi Hospital, coupled with Exs.A.3, medical certificate, A.4, discharge summary, A.7, medical bills, C.1, case sheet, sufficiently established that the claimant has sustained grievous injuries and fracture of both bones of right leg and incurred huge medical expenditure, the Tribunal awarded meager amount towards compensation and prayed to enhance the same.
10. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2-Insurance Company sought to sustain the impugned award of the Tribunal contending that considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant and the period of treatment, the learned Tribunal has awarded reasonable compensation and the same needs no interference by this Court.
11. As regards 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, FIR & A.2, Final Report, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of auto bearing No. AP 25 X 1409. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the said finding of the Tribunal which is based on appreciation of 5 MGP, J Macma_65_2017 evidence in proper perspective. Thus, the only dispute in the present appeal is with regard to the quantum of compensation.
12. Coming to the quantum of compensation, according to the claimant, he was aged about 32 years at the time of accident and used to earn Rs.15,000/- per month on agriculture. But no evidence is produced, either oral or documentary, to prove his income and avocation. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.9,000/- towards loss of earnings during the treatment period. Ex.A.4, discharge summary, discloses that the claimant admitted in the Amrutha Laxmi Hospital on 03.02.2012 and discharged on 09.02.2012 and even after discharging from the hospital, the claimant took follow up treatment for nearly three months. Considering the same, this Court is of the view that the amount of Rs.9,000/- awarded by the tribunal towards loss of income during the treatment period is meagre and therefore, this Court is inclined to award Rs.12,000/- towards loss of earnings. The Tribunal awarded Rs.20,000/- towards transportation, extra nourishment, attendant charges, which is reasonable and the same is not disturbed herewith. However, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the claimant, the tribunal has not granted any amount towards medical expenses as there is difference between the amount claimed by the injured and 6 MGP, J Macma_65_2017 amount shown in medical bills. Therefore, considering the grievous fractures sustained by the claimant and Exs.A3, medical certificate, A.6, hospital bills, A.7, medical bills, this Court is inclined to award Rs.19,698/- towards medical expenses; Rs.20,000/- towards pain and sufferings and Rs.25,000/- towards one fracture of right leg. Thus, in all the claimant is entitled to Rs.96,698/-.
13. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A. is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.54,000/- to Rs.96,698/-. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization to be payable by the respondents. 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, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the same. No costs.
Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_______________________________ JUSTICE M.G. PRIYADARSINI 23.03.2023 gms/tsr 7 MGP, J Macma_65_2017 86 THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G. PRIYADARSINI M.A.C.M.A. No.65 of 2017 DATE: 23.03.2023 gms/tsr