THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
M.A.C.M.A.No.2543 of 2008
JUDGMENT:
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and decree dated 25.03.2008 in O.P.No.890 of 2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Nizamabad (for short 'The Tribunal'), the appellant/claimant preferred the present appeal.
2. Vide the aforesaid award, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) as compensation with proportionate costs and interest at 7.5% per annum thereon from the date of petition till the date of realization. The Tribunal directed respondent Nos.1 and 2 to deposit the amount.
3. The appellant/claimant filed the claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 166(1)(a) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 r/w Rule 455 of the A.P.M.V Rules for an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only) for the injuries sustained by the appellant in the road accident.
4. Respondent No.1 is the owner of the Auto and respondent No.2 is the Insurance Company Limited.
5. Heard Sri Lakkadi Dayaker Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant.
2
SKS,J MACMA.No.2543_2008
6. Insurance Company not filed any appeal in disputing the liability and also not disputing the amount awarded by the Tribunal.
7. It is the specific contention of learned counsel for the appellant that on 14.02.2003, while the appellant was travelling in auto bearing No.AP 25/T-9671 from Nizamabad to Makloor, on the way when he reached Sukhjith Starch Mill in the limits of Mubaraknagar at about 05:30 AM, the driver of the auto drove the auto at high speed in rash and negligent manner, lost control and dashed against one Andey Prasad in opposite direction, thereafter, the auto turned turtle and fell in ditch, due to which, Ande Prasad received grievous injuries and died on the spot and the appellant herein received multiple factures in the said accident.
8. The Tribunal on consideration the entire evidence, both oral and documentary, gave a finding that the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No.1 and the same vehicle is insured with respondent No.2, as such, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.20,000/- payable by respondent Nos.1 and 2. Aggrieved by the quantum, the claimants filed the present appeal. There is no dispute with regard to the negligence of respondent No.1. The only issue given for the consideration is the appellant is entitled for the enhancement of the compensation.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant received fractural injuries and to prove the same, they examined P.W.2-Dr. T Narsing Rao.
3
SKS,J MACMA.No.2543_2008
10. The Tribunal not considered the same and awarded meager amount as such, he prayed the Court to enhance the compensation. Per contra, learned counsel for the Insurance Company would submit that there are no infirmities in the order of the Tribunal and there is no need to interfere in the orders.
11. As seen from the record, to prove the claim, the appellant himself examined as P.W.1 and also examined P.W.2-Medical Officer and Exs.A1 to A4 are marked.
12. To prove the injuries, Dr.T. Narsing Rao examined as P.W.2 and according to him, the appellant received two fractural injuries and they are grievous in nature. Ex.A2-Wound Certificate also shows that the appellant received two fractural injuries and the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.10,000/- each.
13. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering for two injuries which is meager. As the appellant received two fractural injuries, he is entitled for Rs.30,000/- under the head of pain and suffering. Further, the appellant have claimed Rs.1,50,000/- for his treatment and no documents filed to prove his claim and the Tribunal not awarded any amount under medical expenses as the appellant has sustained two fractural injuries, an amount of Rs.20,000/- is awarded under medical expenses and not awarded any amount under the head of loss of temporary earnings. As he sustained injuries, he could not have 4 SKS,J MACMA.No.2543_2008 attended his duties for six months. Therefore, an amount of Rs.3,000/- per month has taken as monthly income and awarded Rs.18,000/- towards loss of temporary earnings. It is also awarded an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards damage to the clothes and Rs.25,000/- towards transportation and extra nourishment.
Heads Amounts
Pain and suffering (two grievous Rs.30,000/-
injuries Rs.15,000 X 2 and two
simple injuries Rs.5,000 X 2)
Medical expenses Rs. 20,000/-
Transportation and extra Rs.25,000/-
nourishment
Loss of temporary earnings Rs.18,000/-
Damage to clothes Rs.5,000/-
Total Rs.98,000/-
14. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed in part. Accordingly, the Judgment and decree dated 25.03.2008 in O.P.No.890 of 2004 passed by the Tribunal are modified enhancing the compensation from Rs.20,000/- to Rs.98,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization against respondent Nos.1 and 2.
15. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severely liable to pay the same and directed to deposit the said amount with interest and costs after 5 SKS,J MACMA.No.2543_2008 deducting the amount, if any, deposited earlier within one(1) month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this Judgment and thereafter, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the same. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J DATE: 08.11.2023 SAI 6 SKS,J MACMA.No.2543_2008 1101 THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA M.A.C.M.A.No.2543 of 2008 Date:08.11.2023 SAI