THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
M.A.C.M.A.No.857 of 2008
JUDGMENT:
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and decree dated 03.08.2007 in O.P.No.3169 of 2005 passed by the V Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge (Mahila Court)-cum- XIX Additional Chief Judge, City Criminal Courts, Hyderabad (for short 'The Tribunal'), the appellant/claimant preferred the present appeal.
2. Vide the aforesaid award, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.1,14,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fourteen Thousand only) as compensation with proportionate costs and interest at 7.00% 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 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 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 bearing No. AP 24 V 4921 and respondent No.2 is the Insurance Company Limited.
5. Heard Sri R. Narender, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2-Insurance Company.
2
SKS,J MACMA.No.857_2008
6. Insurance Company has 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 12.05.2005 the appellant along with some others boarded an auto at Mallepally village to go to Ajmapuram village on his personal work. At about 02:00 P.M., when the auto reached the outskirts of the village Chinnamnenipally, the driver of the auto drove it in a rash and negligent manner and lost control over the auto, as a result, the auto turned turtle and all the passengers, including the appellant, sustained 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.1,14,000/- payable by respondent Nos.1 and 2. Aggrieved by the quantum, the claimant filed the present appeal.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that though the appellant received fractural injuries and he was in the hospital for a period of three (3) months, 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 enhance the said amount.
3
SKS,J MACMA.No.857_2008
11. As seen from the record, to prove the claim, the appellant examined himself as P.W.1 and also examined Medical Officer as P.W.2 and marked Exs.A1 to A11 and Ex.C1. R.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.B1 to B3 and Exs.X1 and X2 were marked on behalf of the respondent No.2.
12. To prove the injuries, Dr. Prashanth examined as P.W.2 and according to him, the appellant received fractural injuries and due to the accident he got permanent disability.
13. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.25,000/- towards pain and suffering for the injuries which is reasonable and the same is maintained. Further, basing on Exs.A6 and A9, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.46,290/- towards medical expenses which is reasonable and the same is maintained. Further, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards transportation charges, whereas, as seen from the record, the appellant treated for more than two months. Therefore, Rs.25,000/- is awarded towards transportation charges and extra nourishment. Further, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.12,500/- under the head of loss of earnings taking the income of the appellant for consideration as Rs.2,500/- per month for a period of six (6) months which is meager amount, as the appellant is doing business. He did not disclose the name of the business. Now, the income of the appellant is taken as Rs.4,000/- per month and total Rs.24,000/- is awarded for a period of six (6) months. Considering the age and probable disability of the appellant, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.5,000/- which is meager. To prove the disability, the petitioner filed 4 SKS,J MACMA.No.857_2008 Ex.A7-Disability Certificate, whereas, perusal of said document it does not specify the nature of disability. Considering the age of the petitioner an amount of Rs.50,000/- is awarded under the head of future amenities. Further an amount of Rs.5,000/- is awarded towards Damage to clothes.
14. In the light of the above mentioned discussion, the claimants are entitled to the following amounts:
Heads Amounts
Pain and suffering Rs.25,000/-
Medical expenses Rs. 46,290/-
Transportation and extra Rs.25,000/-
nourishment
Loss of temporary earnings Rs.24,000/-
Future amenities Rs.50,000/-
Damage to clothes Rs.5,000/-
Total Rs.1,75,290/- (Rounded off to
Rs.1,76,000/-)
15. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed in part. Accordingly, the Judgment and decree dated 03.08.2007 in O.P.No.3169 of 2005 passed by the Tribunal are modified enhancing the compensation from Rs.1,14,000/- to Rs.1,76,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Seventy-Six Thousand 5 SKS,J MACMA.No.857_2008 only) with interest at the rate of 7.00% per annum from the date of petition till realization against respondent Nos.1 and 2.
16. 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: 15.11.2023 SAI