Telangana High Court
Narendla Naresh vs Sri K. Krishna Goud And Another on 20 November, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO
M.A.C.M.A. No.2579 of 2009
JUDGMENT:
Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Addl. District Judge, (FTC), Nizamabad (for short 'the Tribunal') in O.P. No.2028 of 2001, dated 22.07.2005, the present appeal is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation.
2. It is brought to the notice of this Court that Sri Venkateshwar Varanasi, learned counsel for the appellant is no more. Hence on 12.09.2024, this Court directed the Registry to issue notice to the appellant. Pursuant to the said order, the Registry sent notice to the appellant and the same was returned with a postal endorsement as 'no such person in the house'. In the event this Court issued a fresh notice, no fruitful purpose would be served. The matter pertains to the year 2009. Hence, this Court appointed Sri M.Kiran Reddy as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court and as there is no representation on behalf of respondent No.2-The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, this Court appointed Sri A.Ramakrishna Reddy, to appear on behalf of respondent No.2.
2
3. Brief facts of case:
3.1 On 09.10.1999 the appellant was going by the side of the road by walk and when he reached near Vinayaknagar Hanuman Temple at about 7-30 a.m., one Scooter bearing No.AP.25.E.8842 being driven by its rider came in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and dashed the appellant. Due to which he sustained fracture of skull, injury to left ear, multiple and grievous injuries on face, fracture of ribs and other grievous injuries all over the body. Immediately he was shifted to Government Headquarters Hospital, Nizamabad where he was treated as inpatient. Thereafter he took treatment with private doctors and incurred a sum of Rs.60,000/- towards medical expenses. At the time of accident, the appellant was aged about 15 years and working as a milk vendor and earning Rs.3,000/- per month.
Thus, the appellant claimed compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- under various heads against respondent Nos.1 and 2.
4. Considering the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal has allowed the O.P. in part and awarded compensation of Rs.5,500/- to be payable by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severally.
3
5. Heard Sri M.Kiran Reddy as Amicus Curiae and Sri A.Ramakrishna Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contended that though the appellant sustained grievous injuries and examined PWs.1 and 2 and produced Exs.A1 to A6, the Tribunal without considering the same, awarded meager amount of Rs.5,500/-.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the Tribunal after taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence on record, has rightly awarded an amount of Rs.5,500/- towards compensation under all heads. Therefore, the appellant is not entitled for enhancement of compensation as claimed by him in this appeal.
8. This Court considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and perused the records. It is an undisputed fact that due to rash and negligent driving of the rider of scooter bearing No.AP.25.E.8842, the accident was taken place on 09.10.1999, as a result of which, the appellant has sustained grievous injuries and was admitted in the Government Hospital, Nizamabad on 9.10.1999 and he was discharged on 15.10.1999. 4 To prove the said factum, the appellant filed Ex.A3 copy of wound certificate and Ex.A5 discharge card. However, the Tribunal has disbelieved the same only on the ground that the appellant has not examined the Doctor. Admittedly, there is no dispute regarding the appellant's admission in the Government Hospital, Nizamabad. As per Ex.A3 copy of wound certificate, the appellant has sustained injury on right temporal region and injury on upper lip left side. The Tribunal has awarded only an amount of Rs.2,000/- for the injuries, which appears to be meager. The appellant is a student and also working as milk vendor. Therefore, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant, this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled for Rs.50,000/- for the injuries sustained by him, Rs.15,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.10,000/- towards transportation charges and Rs.10,000/- towards food and extra nourishment. The appellant is also entitled for Rs.10,000/- towards litigation expenses as per the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in V.Mekala v. M.Malathi and another1. Thus in all, the appellant is entitled for an amount of Rs.95,000/- under all counts.
1 2014 (5) ALD 42 SC 5
9. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A. is allowed in part enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.5,500/- to Rs.95,000/-. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization against the respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severally. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the appellant is entitled to withdraw the said amount without furnishing any security. No costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.
_________________________________ JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO Date: 20.11.2024 pgp