1
SKS,J
MACMA.No.841_2008
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
M.A.C.M.A.No.841 of 2008
JUDGMENT:
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and decree dated 30.07.2007 in O.P.No.339 of 2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional District Judge, (Fast Tract Court), 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.43,000/- (Rupees Forty-Three 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.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) for the injuries sustained by the appellant in the road accident.
4. Respondent No.1 is the owner of the T.V.S. Victor Motor Cycle and respondent No.2 is the Insurance Company Limited.
5. Heard Sri K.M. Mahender Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Sri P. Bhanu Prakash, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2-Insurance Company.
2
SKS,J MACMA.No.841_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 29.06.2003, at about 12:00 noon, while the appellant along with his relative were proceedings from Armoor to Shantinagar, a motor cycle bearing No.AP 25 F 9740 when they reached near Gutpa turning on NH 16 road, another T.V.S Victor Motor Cycle bearing No.AP 25 H 9484 came in High Speed driven in rash and negligent manner and its rider lost control over it and dashed the appellant's motor cycle. As a result, the appellant and pillion rider received grievous injuries and the motor cycle also damaged.
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.43,000/- payable by respondent Nos.1 and 2. Aggrieved by the quantum, the claimants filed the present appeal.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that though he received fractural injuries and he was in the hospital for a period of 15 days, the Tribunal did not considered the same and awarded only meager amount.
10. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submitted that the Tribunal awarded sufficient amount and there is no need to interfere in the said amount.
3
SKS,J MACMA.No.841_2008
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 A9 are marked.
12. To prove the injuries, Dr. Sanjeev Singh Yadav examined as P.W.2 and according to him, the appellant received four injuries. Out of them, two are fractural injuries and two are simple injuries. On his clinical examination, P.W.2 found two fractural injuries and referred the appellant to the better hospital. Therefore, the appellant went to Hyderabad and treated in Venkateshwara Nursing Home, Hyderabad.
13. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.15,000/- towards pain and suffering for all the four injuries which is meager. As the appellant received two fractural injuries, he is entitled for Rs.30,000/- for fractural injuries and Rs.10,000/- for two simple injuries under the head of pain and suffering. Further, basing on Exs.A5 and A6, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards medical expenses which is reasonable and the same is maintained. Further, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.3,000/- towards transportation charges, whereas, as seen from the record, the appellant was first went to P.W.2-Doctor and on his recommendation, he went to Hyderabad for better treatment. Therefore, an amount awarded by the Tribunal is not sufficient and the appellant filed Ex.A7-bills of transportation to prove the transportation charges. Therefore, Rs.25,000/- is awarded towards transportation charges and extra nourishment. Further, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.12,000/- 4
SKS,J MACMA.No.841_2008 under the head of loss of earnings taking the income of the appellant for consideration as Rs.2,000/- per month for a period of six (6) months which is meager amount as the appellant is an agriculturist and milk vendor. Now, the income of the appellant is taken as Rs.6,000/- per month and total Rs.36,000/- is awarded for a period of six (6) months. Further, an amount of Rs.5,000/- is awarded towards Damage to clothes.
Heads Amounts
Pain and suffering (two grievous Rs.40,000/-
injuries Rs.15,000 X 2 and two
simple injuries Rs.5,000 X 2)
Medical expenses Rs. 10,000/-
Transportation and extra Rs.25,000/-
nourishment
Loss of temporary earnings Rs.36,000/-
Damage to clothes Rs. 5,000/-
Total Rs.1,16,000/-
14. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed in part. Accordingly, the Judgment and decree dated 30.07.2007 in O.P.No.339 of 2004 passed by the Tribunal are modified enhancing the compensation from Rs.43,000/- to Rs.1,16,000/- (Rupees One lakh Sixteen Thousand only) with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization against respondent Nos.1 and 2.
5
SKS,J MACMA.No.841_2008
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 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: 09.11.2023 SAI