Mayaluri Sir Vidya vs Anga Prabhakar 2 Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 1145 AP

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO

                    M.A.C.M.A.No.3175 of 2012


JUDGEMENT:

The appellant is the Claimant in M.V.O.P.No.178 of 2011 on

the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- V Additional

District Judge, Ongole and the respondents are the respondents in

the said case.

2. Both the parties in the appeal will be referred to as they are

arrayed in claim application.

3. The claimant filed a Claim Petition under section 166 of Motor

Vehicles Act against the respondents praying the Tribunal to award

an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation to the injuries

sustained by the petitioner in a Motor Vehicle Accident occurred on

08.06.2008.

4. The case of the claimant is that the petitioner and others went

to Tirupathi for Darshan of Lord Venkateswara Swamy in Tempo

van and when they were returning on 08.06.2008 at about 6.00 a.m.

and when they reached Silpa Township at Kurnool, the driver of VGKRJ MACMA 3175 of 2012 Page 2 of 6 Dt:27.02.2023

Tipper bearing No.AP 21 TT 0110 drove the same in a rash and

negligent manner and dashed the Tempo van, in which the

petitioner and others were travelling, resulting which the petitioner

and others received injuries and some of them including the driver of

the Tempo died on the spot. The petitioner received injuries and the

petitioner claimed an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards

compensation.

5. The respondent Nos.1 and 2 remained exparte. The third

respondent filed counter denying the claim application and

contended that the claimant is not entitled any compensation and

the third respondent is not liable to pay any compensation to the

injuries sustained by the petitioner.

6. Based on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the

following issues:

i. Whether the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the tipper bearing No.AP 21 TT 0110 by its driver?

ii. Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation, if so, to what amount and from whom?

iii. To what relief?

 VGKRJ                                            MACMA 3175 of 2012
Page 3 of 6                                      Dt:27.02.2023

7. On behalf of the petitioner, PW1 and PW2 were examined

and Ex.A1 to Ex.A4 were marked. On behalf of respondents RW1

was examined and Ex.B1 and Ex.B2 were marked.

8. After considering the evidence on record, the Tribunal has

given a finding that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent

driving of driver of offending vehicle and the Tribunal granted an

amount of Rs.8,000/- to the claimant towards compensation.

9. Aggrieved by the same, the claimant filed the present appeal

by claiming the remaining balance of compensation amount.

10. Now, the point for consideration is:

Whether the Order of Tribunal needs any interference?

11. POINT :-

It is brought to the notice of this Court that the Tribunal below

came to conclusion that the accident occurred due to rash and

negligent driving of the Tipper driver. I have seen the order passed

by the Tribunal, against the said finding, no appeal is filed by any of

the respondents. As seen from the order of the learned Tribunal VGKRJ MACMA 3175 of 2012 Page 4 of 6 Dt:27.02.2023

below, the claimant is aged about 15 years by the date of accident

and she sustained simple injury only and awarded an amount is

Rs.2,000/- only for pain and suffering, but no separate

compensation is awarded under the head of injury. Therefore, an

amount of Rs.2,000/- is awarded to the claimant for simple injuries.

The Tribunal after assigning reasons came to conclusion that the

claimant is entitled an amount of Rs.1,000/- towards expenditure for

treatment and Rs.5,000/- for loss of earnings. Against the said

finding no cross appeal is filed by the respondents herein. As seen

from the order of the learned Tribunal, the claimant is aged about 15

years, because of this accident she has suffered severe mental

agony and the claimant is also hospitalized for about five days.

Considering the above aspect an amount of Rs.3,000/- is awarded

towards mental agony.

12. Therefore, an amount of Rs.2,000/- is awarded towards simple

injury and an amount of Rs.3,000/- is awarded under the head of

mental agony to the claimant in addition to the compensation

granted by the Tribunal below. Accordingly, the compensation

awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.8,000/- to Rs.13,000/-.

 VGKRJ                                          MACMA 3175 of 2012
Page 5 of 6                                    Dt:27.02.2023

13. In the result, the appeal is allowed in-part, by modifying the

order dated 06.08.2012 passed in MVOP No.178/2011 on the file of

the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- V Additional District Judge

(FTC), Ongole. It is held that the appellant is entitled to a total

compensation of Rs.13,000/- with interest @9% p.a. on the

enhanced compensation, from the date of petition, till the date of

payment. The respondents 1 to 3 are directed to deposit the

balance amount within one month from the date of this judgment.

On such deposit, the appellant is entitled to withdraw the same

along with accrued interest thereon. There shall be no order as to

costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand closed.

________________________________ V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO,J Dated: 27.02.2023.

sj
 VGKRJ                                    MACMA 3175 of 2012
Page 6 of 6                              Dt:27.02.2023

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO

M.A.C.M.A.No.3175 of 2012

27.02.2023

sj