Telangana High Court
Akkala Yadagiri , Yadaiah vs C.Rama Rao on 20 November, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO
M.A.C.M.A.No.1132 of 2009
JUDGMENT:
Aggrieved by the award dated 30.01.2009 in O.P.No.1922 of 2007 passed by the XXII Additional Chief Judge -cum- Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, City Criminal Court at Hyderabad (herein after referred as "Tribunal"), the appellant has filed this appeal for enhancement of the compensation amount.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. No representation on behalf of respondent No.2. Sri A.Rama Krishna Reddy, learned counsel, panel counsel of respondent No.2 Insurance Company, who is readily available in the Court was appointed to appear on behalf of respondent No.2.
3. Brief facts of the case:
3.1. On 04.06.2007, the appellant along with others travelling in a Tractor Trolley belonging to one Muttavarapu Ashwani proceeding from Gundannapalli to Gauraram village limits, one lorry bearing No. AP 10 V 2002 came with high speed in rash and negligent manner and dashed the tractor trolley, due to which, it was turned turtle and the appellant along with others received JSR, J MACMA_1132_2009 2 grievous injures and he was admitted in NIMS hospital. The appellant and one K.Karunakar Reddy sustained grievous injuries. The concerned police, Gauraram registered a case in Crime No.38 of 2007 against the driver of the lorry. The appellant is working as a labourer and used to earn Rs.4,000/- per month and due to accident, he suffered pain and mental agony and not doing leg works. The appellant filed OP No.1922 of 2007 claiming compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- under various heads. The Tribunal below awarded an amount of Rs.62,000/-. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed the present appeal.
4. Submissions of learned counsel for the appellant:
4.1. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that due to the accident, the appellant sustained grievous injuries and he was admitted in the NIMS hospital as an in-patient from 04.06.2007 to 01.07.2007. There is fracture of right femur degloving injury to left leg and foot with chip fracture lateral condyle tibia and fracture of head and left fibula and percentage of the disability assessed to 40%. The appellant filed the disability certificate under Ex.A8 to prove said disability and PW.2 doctor was examined on behalf of the appellant. The Tribunal without taking JSR, J MACMA_1132_2009 3 into consideration of the evidence of PW.2, awarded meager amount of Rs.62,000/-. The Tribunal below has calculated the income of the appellant as Rs.2,000/- per month. He submitted that the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Ramachandrappa Vs. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance 1 has considered the monthly income of the daily wage labourer at Rs.4,500/- without there being any evidence. In such circumstances, the Tribunal below ought to have consider the income of the appellant at Rs.4,5000/- per month.
4.2 He further submitted that the appellant filed Ex.A6 medical bills for Rs.22,762/-, the Tribunal awarded only Rs.10,000/- towards medical expenses and also awarded meager amount of Rs.5,000/- towards extra nourishment. Hence, the appellant is entitled for enhancement of compensation.
5. Submissions of learned counsel for respondent No.2:
5.1. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 insurance company contended that the Tribunal has rightly passed the impugned judgment awarding an amount 1 (2011) 13 SCC 236 JSR, J MACMA_1132_2009 4 of Rs.62,000/- and the appellant is not entitled for enhancement of compensation.
6. Analysis of the case:
This Court considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and perused the record. It is an undisputed fact that the appellant sustained grievous injuries in the accident due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of lorry of respondent No.1 and he was shifted to NIMS hospital wherein he was treated as in-patient from 04.06.2007 to 01.07.2007 and he spent an amount of Rs.22,762/- towards medical expenses and the appellant filed Ex.A6 medical bills to prove said factum. However, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards medical expenses only without giving any reasons. Hence this Court of the view that the appellant is entitled for the above said amount of Rs.22,762/-. In so far as, the loss of income of the appellant is concerned, as per the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ramachandrappa (supra), the income of the appellant who is the daily labourer is to be taken at Rs.4,500/- per month even in the absence of any evidence. Since the appellant was aged about 28 years at the JSR, J MACMA_1132_2009 5 time of accident, the appropriate multiplier in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation 2 would be "17". Though the appellant filed Ex.A8 disability certificate claiming his disability as 40%, the appellant has not examined the Doctor, who treated him, on the other hand, examined one Dr.Ch.Sulapani as PW.2, who has not given any treatment to the appellant. However, taking into consideration of the injuries sustained by the appellant i.e., fracture to his right femur degloving injury to left leg and foot with chip fracture lateral condyle tibia and fracture of head and left fibula, the Tribunal ought to have consider the disability of the appellant as 20%. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that if the disability of the appellant is considered as 20%, he is entitled an amount of Rs.4,500 x 12 x 17 x 20/100 = 1,83,600/-
towards loss of income. The appellant is entitled for an amount of Rs.25,000/- towards extra nourishment and Rs.25,000/- towards pain and suffering and transportation charges. In addition to the above said amount, as per the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of "V.Mekala vs M. Malathi and others" 3, the appellant is entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards 2 2009 ACJ 1298 (SC) 3 2014 (5) ALD 42 SC JSR, J MACMA_1132_2009 6 costs of litigation. In the light of above discussion, the appellant is entitled for an amount of Rs.2,66,362/-.
6. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A is allowed in part enhancing the compensation amount granted by the Tribunal to the appellant from Rs.62,000/- to Rs.2,66,362/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Sixty Six Thousand Three Hundred and Sixty Two only). The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of realization. The enhanced amount shall be deposited by respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severally within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount without furnishing any security. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
______________________________ JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO Date: 20.11.2024 pld