Telangana High Court
R. Narender Reddy vs N. Bhaskar Reddy And Anr on 13 February, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
M.A.C.M.A. No.2835 OF 2006
JUDGMENT:
1. Appellant-claimant filed this appeal against the Order and Decree dated 17.10.2006 in O.P.No.10 of 2004 on the file of the I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge-Cum-XV Additional Chief Judge at Hyderabad, where under the Tribunal granted an amount of Rs.52,125/- towards compensation along with interest @ 7.5% per annum as against the claim of Rs.2,00,000/- on account of the injuries sustained by the appellant in the motor vehicle accident occurred on 23.05.2003.
2. The manner of accident and the injuries sustained by the appellant-claimant are not in dispute and the appellant challenged the impugned award only on the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to go into other details other than the quantum of compensation.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company.
4. The case of the appellant is that on 23.05.2003 while the appellant was going on his Hero Honda Splendor motorcycle from Ibrahimpatnam towards Hyderabad, a tipper in the opposite 2 direction came in a rash and negligent manner with a high speed and dashed his motorcycle, due to which the appellant sustained fracture injuries. The 2nd respondent is the insurer of the tipper vehicle. It is admitted that the appellant was travelling with another adult and his daughter who is aged 5 years on the motorcycle.
5. The Tribunal placing reliance on the judgment of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in United India Insurance Co., Ltd., vs. K.Anjaiah and others 1 held that when three adults travel on a two wheeler and if the said vehicle involves in an accident, there would be 25% contributory negligence on the part of the two wheeler driver, since triple riding is forbidden. In the present case, two adults and a child aged 5 years were travelling on a motor cycle, as such, a 5 year old child would be under the care of parents and she would not be any hindrance while travelling on a motor cycle.. The said judgment relied on by the Tribunal has no application to the present facts of the case since in the case relied on by the Tribunal, three adults were travelling for which reason, the Court gave a finding that there was 25% contributory negligence on the part of the driver of the two wheeler.
1 2004 (4) ALD 444 3
6. In the present facts of the case, the findings of the Tribunal to the extent of 25% contributory negligence on the part of the appellant is hereby set aside. Further though Ex.A-5, bunch of medical bills including discharge bills disclose a total sum of Rs.65,878/-, the Tribunal had considered only Rs.30,000/- towards medical bills. No reasons are given by the Tribunal as to why the amount was reduced to Rs.30,000/- when bunch of bills totaling to Rs.65,878/- was filed by the claimant. On the ground that no reasons are given for reducing the amount claimed for medical bills, this Court is inclined to set aside the reduced amount of Rs.30,000/- towards medical bills and restore the claim to Rs.65,878/-.
7. In the result, the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed setting aside the 25% contributory negligence which comes to Rs.69,500/- and restoring the amount of Rs.65,878/- towards medical bills setting aside the reduced amount of Rs.30,000/-, the difference amount would be Rs.35,878/-. Accordingly, the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.52,125/- to Rs.1,05,378/- (Rs.69,500+Rs.35,878). The enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of 4 realization. Except the above enhancement, the award of the Tribunal shall remain same on all other aspects. There shall be no order as to costs.
8. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No costs.
__________________ K.SURENDER, J Date : 13.02.2024 dv