Rs.37 vs Unknown
2023 Latest Caselaw 3877 AP

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO

                 M.A.C.M.A.No.3617 of 2012

JUDGMENT:

Aggrieved by the impugned decree and order passed in

M.V.O.P.No.52 of 2004, on the file of the Motor Vehicle

Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge,

Visakhapatnam, whereby the Tribunal awarded an amount of

Rs.37,000/- towards total compensation to the claimant, this

instant appeal is preferred by the claimant for enhancement of

compensation of the claim.

2. For the sake of convenience, both the parties in the

appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed in the claim

application.

3. The aforesaid M.V.O.P.No.52 of 2004 was filed by the

claim petitioner, under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act

claiming compensation of Rs.3,50,000/- for the injuries

sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident occurred on

18.11.2001.

4. The brief averments of the claim petition are as follows:

On 18.11.2001 while the injured Gondesi Satya Venkata

Rajesh Reddy along with others proceeding to Nakkapalli by a

Car bearing No.AP 31 S 3555 and when they reached

Purushothampuram Junction on NH5 road, the Car was turned

turtle and dashed a tree due to the rash and negligent driving

of the driver of the Car. The petitioner sustained grievous

injuries all over the body especially on his head. A case in

Crime No.60/2001 was registered by the Station House

Officer, Yelamanchili Police Station against 1st respondent. 1st

respondent is the driver, 2nd respondent is the owner and 3rd

respondent is the insurer of the offending vehicle Car.

5. 1st and 2nd respondents remained ex parte.

6. 3rd respondent filed a counter and denied the liability of

compensation and pleaded that the claim of the claimant is

excessive.

7. Based on the above pleadings of both the parties, the

Tribunal framed the following issues for trial:

1. Whether the pleaded accident occurred resulting in

injuries to the petitioner-Gondesi Satya Venkata

Rajesh Reddy, was it due to the rash and negligent

driving of the motor vehicle (car) bearing

Regn.No.AP 31 S 3555, by its driver, 1st

respondent?

      2.    Whether     the   petitioner   is     entitled to any

            compensation, and If       so, what          amount,

and what is the liability of the respondents?

3. To what relief?

8. During the course of enquiry, on behalf of the claim

petitioner, P.Ws.1 to 4 were examined and got marked

Ex.A1 to A14 and Ex.X1. On behalf of 3rd respondent, none of

the witnesses were examined and no documents were

marked.

9. At the culmination of the enquiry, on appreciation of the

entire evidence on record, the Tribunal came to conclusion that

the accident in question is occurred due to rash and negligent

driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Car and awarded

an amount of Rs.37,000/- to the claim petitioner towards total

compensation for the injuries sustained by him in a motor

vehicle accident occurred on 18.11.2001. Aggrieved by the

said quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the

claim petitioner filed the present appeal seeking enhancement

of compensation.

10. Heard both sides.

11. Now, the points for determination are:

1) Whether the order passed by the Tribunal needs

any interference? If so, to what extent?

2) Whether the appellant/claim petitioner is

entitled enhanced compensation as prayed for?

POINTS:

12. On appreciation of the oral evidence of P.W.1 coupled

with Ex.A1 attested copy of the First Information Report and

Ex.A2 attested copy of the Charge Sheet, the Tribunal came to

conclusion that the accident in question is occurred due to rash

and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle Car

bearing No.AP 31 S 3555. No appeal is filed by the

respondents against the said finding given by the Tribunal.

I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the said finding given by

the Tribunal. Therefore, there is no need to interfere with the

above finding given by the Tribunal.

13. Coming to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal,

the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.37,000/- towards total

compensation to the claimant, against which the present

appeal is filed by the claimant for enhancement of

compensation. On considering the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 4

and on considering the documentary evidence on record, the

Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.2,000/- towards transport

charges and an amount of Rs.20,000/- towards extra

nourishment and medical expenses. I do not find any illegality

in awarding the said compensation by the Tribunal under the

above two heads. The Tribunal awarded an amount of

Rs.15,000/- towards pain and suffering. As seen from the

material on record, the claimant sustained three grievous

injuries and two simple injuries. Therefore, it is desirable to

award an amount of Rs.45,000/- for three grievous injuries at

the rate of Rs.15,000/- per each grievous injury and an amount

of Rs.6,000/- is awarded towards two simple injuries at the rate

of Rs.3,000/- per each simple injury. Learned counsel for the

appellant would submit that no amount is awarded under the

head of disability. The contention of the appellant is that he

sustained disability of 20%. The Tribunal on considering the

evidence on record held in its order that the disability certificate

is issued by another doctor, but the claimant failed to examine

the said doctor who issued the said disability certificate and

that the Tribunal did not consider the said aspect. On

considering the entire material on record, since the injured boy

is aged about 13 years, I am of the considered view that an

amount of Rs.20,000/- is awarded towards loss of discomfort

to the claimant. In total, an amount of Rs.93,000/- is awarded

towards total compensation. Therefore, the claimant is entitled

enhanced compensation of Rs.56,000/-.

14. It is not in dispute by both the parties that the offending

vehicle is insured with 3rd respondent/Insurance Company and

the policy is in force and the driver of the offending vehicle Car

is also having valid driving license. Therefore, 3rd respondent

is liable to pay the enhanced compensation as ordered by this

Court.

15. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed by enhancing

the compensation awarded by the Tribunal for an amount of

Rs.37,000/- to Rs.93,000/-, consequently 3rd respondent

is directed to deposit the enhanced

compensation of Rs.56,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5%

per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit

within two months before the Tribunal. On such deposit the

claimant is entitled to withdraw the same along with interest

there on. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending,

shall stand closed.

____________________________________ JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO

Dt.14.08.2023 ANI

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO

M.A.C.M.A.No.3617 of 2012

Dt.14.08.2023

ANI