THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
M.A.C.M.A.No.1131 of 2008
JUDGMENT:
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and decree dated 30.01.2008 in O.P.No.598 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.40,000/- (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, 1989 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 vehicle and respondent No.2 is the Insurance Company Limited.
2
SKS,J MACMA.No.1131_2008
5. Heard Sri Y.S. Yella Nand Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the appellant.
6. Insurance Company not filed any appeal 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 23.03.2004 at 08:00 P.M., while the appellant and others were travelling in auto bearing No. AP 25 U 6087 from Sarangapur to Nizamabad near turning at Arsapally Village, driver of the vehicle drove the same in rash and negligent manner at high speed and dashed the cyclist from behind, and auto was turned turtle. Due to which, the appellant sustained fractural injuries.
8. The Tribunal on considering 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.40,000/- payable by respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severely. Aggrieved by the quantum, the appellant filed the present appeal.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that though the appellant received fractural injuries, only Rs.40,000 against the claim 3 SKS,J MACMA.No.1131_2008 of Rs.3,00,000/- was awarded and the appellant was incurred an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- for the medical expenses which was not considered by the Tribunal. There is no amount awarded under the head of loss of earnings. As such, he prayed the Court to enhance the compensation of Rs.40,000/- to Rs.3,00,000/-
10. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 supported the award and prayed the Court to dismiss the appeal as there are no infirmities in the order of the Tribunal. There is no dispute with regard to the liability. The only contention of the appellant is against the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Now, it is to be seen whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is meager in nature and the appellant is entitled for the enhancement of the compensation.
11. To prove the injuries, the appellant examined P.W.2-Doctor by name Dr. P.V. Sudhakar working as a Medical Superintendent in District Headquarters Hospital, Nizamabad and Dr. Sudheer who was working as Civil Assistant Surgeon in District Head Quarters Hospital on contract basis. He can identify his writing and signature. Copy of the Wound Certificate-Ex.A2 had shown the handwriting of the said Dr. Sudheer. As per Ex.A2, the said Dr. Sudheer examined the 4 SKS,J MACMA.No.1131_2008 appellant and found five injuries, out of them, three are grievous injuries.
12. 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.
13. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.35,000/- towards pain and suffering for all the five injuries, which is meager. As the appellant received three fractural injuries, he is entitled for Rs.45,000/- for fractural injuries and Rs.10,000/- for two simple injuries under the head of pain and suffering. Further, the appellant claimed Rs.1,00,000/- towards medical treatment, no evidence is adduced to prove the same. Therefore, the Tribunal has not awarded any amount under the head of medical expenses. Whereas, admittedly, the appellant was received fractural injuries, as such, the amount of Rs.20,000/- is awarded under the head of medical expenses which is reasonable. Further, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards transportation and extra nourishment which is not sufficient as the appellant received fractural injuries. Therefore, an amount of Rs.25,000/- awarded towards transportation and extra nourishment. The appellant was not awarded any amount under the head of loss of temporary earnings. As the appellant was 5 SKS,J MACMA.No.1131_2008 sustained fractural injuries she would not have attended regular duties for a period of six (6) months as the appellant was beedi roller, her monthly income was taken as Rs.5,000/- per month. An amount of Rs.30,000/- is awarded towards loss of temporary earnings. Further, the appellant is awarded an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards damage to the clothes.
Heads Amounts
Pain and suffering (three grievous
injuries Rs.15,000 X 3 and two Rs.55,000/-
simple injuries Rs.5,000 X 2)
Medical expenses Rs. 20,000/-
Transportation and extra
Rs.25,000/-
nourishment
Loss of temporary earnings Rs.30,000/-
Damage of clothes
Rs.5,000/-
Total Rs.1,35,000/-
14. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed in part. Accordingly, the Judgment and decree dated 30.01.2008 in O.P.No.598 of 2004 passed by the Tribunal are modified enhancing the compensation from Rs.40,000/- to Rs.1,35,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirty-Five only) with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum 6 SKS,J MACMA.No.1131_2008 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 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:
SAI 7 SKS,J MACMA.No.1131_2008 THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA M.A.C.M.A.No.1131 of 2008 Date:
SAI