Telangana High Court
The Commandant, 8 A Girls Bn Ncc, ... vs Donthinaboina Yellaiah And Anr on 26 February, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
M.A.C.M.A No.796 OF 2008
JUDGMENT:
1. The appellant, who is the Commandant of NCC filed this appeal against the Order and Decree dated 14.11.2006 in M.V.O.P.No.1337 of 2005 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-Cum-IV Additional District Judge, Warangal, where under the Tribunal granted an amount of Rs.64,000/- towards compensation along with interest @ 7.5% per annum as against the claim of Rs.1,00,000/- on account of the injuries received in the motor vehicle accident occurred on 28.12.2004.
2. 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 appearing for respondents.
4. It is the case of the claimant that while he was going in an Auto taking cotton bales, the offending vehicle i.e., DCM Van (Girls NCC) came at a high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the Auto from behind resulting in injuries. The 2 Tribunal examined claimant/injured/P.W.1 and also the Doctor/P.W.2 and marked Exs.A-1 to A-7.
5. The Tribunal deemed it appropriate to grant compensation of Rs.64,000/-under various heads i.e., towards loss of earnings Rs.9,000/-, medical expenses and extra-nourishment Rs.6,000/-, transport charges Rs.1000/-, pain and suffering Rs.10,000/- and disability Rs.38,000/-.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that for an injury of a shoulder, the amount granted is on the higher side, as such, the question of granting compensation towards loss of earnings at Rs.9,000/- would not arise in the present case when the injury is simple in nature. He further submits that the disability certificate was also not issued by the competent Medical Board.
7. The said argument of the learned counsel for the appellant cannot be accepted. The Tribunal had examined P.W.2, who is the Doctor who had treated P.W.1. He entered the witness box and stated that P.W.1's shoulder was fractured, for which reason, there is necessity of taking rest for four months.
8. For the reason of suffering shoulder injury according to the Doctor, the disability is at 30%. Nothing is elicited by the 3 appellant/respondent before the trial Court to discredit the evidence of the Doctor. Infact, the medical certificate dated 03.11.2005 marked as Ex.A-7, is the original handicap certificate issued by the original Medical Board. There is nothing to disbelieve the said certificate. The grounds raised by the counsel for the appellant cannot be sustained.
9. Accordingly, the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
__________________ K.SURENDER, J Date : 26.02.2024 dv