Telangana High Court
The Chairman And Managing Director, ... vs Abdul Suban on 13 February, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
M.A.C.M.A. No.2617 OF 2006
JUDGMENT:
1. The Corporation-respondents filed this appeal against the Order and Decree dated 26.11.2005 in M.V.O.P.No.1262 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-Cum-XXI Additional Chief Judge, Nampally, Hyderabad, where under the Tribunal granted an amount of Rs.4,43,000/- towards compensation along with interest @ 7.5% per annum as against the claim of Rs.8,50,000/- on account of the injuries sustained by the appellant in the motor vehicle accident occurred on 10.04.2002.
2. The manner of accident and the injuries sustained by the appellant-petitioner are not in dispute and the respondents 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 respondents and the learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. Briefly, the case of the petitioner is that while the petitioner was proceedings on his scooter on 10.04.2002 along with his son, at Nirankari Bhavan, Lakdikapool an RTC bus bearing No.AP-10-Z-985 2 came in the same direction in a rash and negligent manner with a high speed and dashed his vehicle due to which, the petitioner sustained injuries. As such, the claim of Rs.8,50,000/-was made.
5. The Tribunal examined P.Ws.1 to 4 and marked Exs.A-1 to A-11 and found that the Driver of the bus was responsible for causing accident and accordingly granted compensation of Rs.4,43,000/-.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the Corporation would submit that even according to the Tribunal, the Bus was coming in the oppose direction, since there was head on collusion, the contributory negligence has to be considered and compensation has to be halved. He further argued that though the appellant claimed to be working in the Food Corporation of India, no proof was filed.
7. Having gone through the record, Ex.A-1 is the original pay certificate filed by the appellant. There is no dispute regarding salary of the appellant. Further, the Tribunal found that the Driver of the bus was in fact responsible for causing the accident as he was driving in a rash and negligent manner resulting the claimant in sustaining injuries.
8. In view of the evidence which was recorded during trial, the finding of the Tribunal regarding negligence of the bus Driver cannot be found fault with. There are no grounds to interfere with the 3 well reasoned award of the Tribunal granting compensation to the appellant.
9. Accordingly, the Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No costs.
__________________ K.SURENDER, J Date : 13.02.2024 dv