The vs District & Sessions Judge
2023 Latest Caselaw 3273 AP

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO

                    M.A.C.M.A.No.3954 of 2014


JUDGEMENT:

The appellant is the Claimant in M.V.O.P.No.382 of 2010 on

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

District & Sessions Judge, Vijayawada and the respondents are the

respondents in the said case.

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 claimant filed a Claim Petition under section 166 of Motor

Vehicles Act, 1988 read with Rule 445 of Motor Vehicles Rules,

1989 against the respondents praying the Tribunal to award an

amount of Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation for the injuries

sustained by her in a Motor Vehicle Accident occurred on

16.06.2009.

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

On 16.06.2009 at about 11.00 p.m., the petitioner along with

3rd respondent were going on motor cycle bearing No.AP 22P 2663 2 VGKRJ MACMA 3954 of 2014

of 3rd respondent to catch the Vijayawada bus to Choutuppal bus

stand and when they reached Yellagiri outskirts at 8648KM stone on

NH-9, the 1st respondent, who is the driver-cum-owner of car

bearing No.AP 29BD 8877, proceeding from Vijayawada to

Hyderabad side, drove the car in a rash and negligent manner at

high speed, without blowing horn and without following traffic rules,

in the process of overtaking another vehicle, dashed the motor cycle

of 3rd respondent, resulting which the petitioner sustained grievous

injuries and the petitioner claimed an amount of Rs.2,00,000/-

towards compensation.

5. The first and third respondents remained exparte. The second

and fourth respondents filed counters denying the claim application

and contended that the claimant is not entitled any compensation

and the second and fourth respondents are not liable to pay any

compensation to the petitioner.

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

following issues:

i. Whether the petitioner sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident occurred on 16.06.2009 at 11.00 3 VGKRJ MACMA 3954 of 2014

p.m., at Yellagiri outskirts, 46/8KM stone on NH-9 Choutappal, due to rash and negligent act of the driver of car bearing No.AP 29BD 8877?

ii. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the compensation as prayed for? If so from whom and to what amount?

iii. To what relief?

7. During the course of enquiry in the claim petition, on behalf

of the petitioner, PW1 and PW2 were examined and Ex.A1 to

Ex.A14 were marked. No oral and documentary evidence was

adduced on behalf of respondents.

8. At the culmination of the enquiry, after considering the

evidence on record and on appreciation of the same, the Tribunal

has given a finding that the accident was occurred due to rash and

negligent driving of driver of offending vehicle car and the Tribunal

granted an amount of Rs.1,04,000/- to the claimant towards

compensation.

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

claiming the remaining balance of compensation amount.

                                  4                               VGKRJ
                                                      MACMA 3954 of 2014

10. Now, the points for consideration are:

1. Whether the Order of Tribunal needs any interference?

2. Whether the claimant/ appellant is entitled for enhancement of compensation as prayed for?

11. POINT Nos.1 and 2:-

On appreciation of the entire evidence on record, the Tribunal

came to conclusion that the accident was occurred due to rash and

negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle car i.e., first

respondent in the claim application. No appeal is filed against the

said finding given by the Tribunal by any of the respondents.

Therefore, there is no need to interfere with the finding given by the

Tribunal.

12. Coming to the compensation granted by the Tribunal, the

Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.1,04,000/- towards

compensation and directed the first and second respondents to pay

the same to the claimant. The claim against respondents 3 and 4 is

dismissed by the Tribunal. The material evidence available on

record goes to show that the claimant sustained grievous injuries in

the accident. As per the evidence of PW2, the claimant sustained 5 VGKRJ MACMA 3954 of 2014

four injuries in a road accident. Out of which, she sustained three

fracture injuries and one simple injury. The Tribunal, on considering

the material on record, awarded Rs.15,000/- towards each grievous

injury, in total, an amount of Rs.45,000/- was awarded towards three

grievous injuries. As seen from the evidence of PW2, the petitioner

is under the care of PW2/Dr.N.Ramesh from 17.07.2009 to

20.10.2009 i.e., approximately more than three months. Therefore, I

am of the considered view that it is just and necessary to award an

amount of Rs.25,000/- for each grievous injury. Accordingly, an

amount of Rs.75,000/- is awarded towards three grievous injuries.

The medical bills filed by the claimant reveals that the claimant

spent an amount of Rs.46,000/- towards medical expenses. In

order to prove the same, the claimant relied on Exs.A11, 12, 13 and

14, but the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.30,000/- only towards

medical expenses, therefore, the same is enhanced to Rs.46,000/-

towards medical expenses. The Tribunal awarded an amount of

Rs.2,000/- towards transport charges, an amount of Rs.5,000/-

towards extra nourishment of food, an amount of Rs.4,000/- towards

medical attendant charges, an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards pain

and suffering, an amount of Rs.6,000/- towards mental agony, an 6 VGKRJ MACMA 3954 of 2014

amount of Rs.3,000/- towards one simple injury and an amount of

Rs.4,000/- towards loss of earnings. By giving cogent reasons, the

Tribunal awarded the said amount under the various heads. There

is no need to interfere with the said finding. The driver of the

offending vehicle is having valid licence and crime vehicle is insured

with second respondent Insurance Company and the policy also in

force. Per contra, no evidence is adduced by the respondents

before the Tribunal. Therefore, the claim granted by the Tribunal for

amount of Rs.1,04,000/- is enhanced to Rs.1,50,000/- and the

claimant is entitled interest @7.5% p.a., and the respondents 1 and

2 are liable to pay the compensation to the claimant.

13. In the result, this appeal is partly allowed by modifying the

order dated 30.08.2014 passed in MVOP No.382/2010 on the file of

the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-VII Additional District and

Sessions Judge, Vijayawada and the claim amount is enhanced

from Rs.1,04,000/- to Rs.1,50,000/-. The petitioner is entitled the

enhanced compensation of Rs.46,000/- with interest @7.5% p.a.

from the date of petition, till the date of payment. The respondents

1 and 2 are directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of 7 VGKRJ MACMA 3954 of 2014

Rs.46,000/- with interest as ordered above, within two months from

the date of this judgment. On such deposit, the appellant/ claimant 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: 03.07.2023.

sj
                         8                            VGKRJ
                                          MACMA 3954 of 2014

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO

M.A.C.M.A.No.3954 of 2014

03.07.2023

sj