Pulapakula Durgaiah vs Thota Phani Kumr And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 1251 AP

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO

                    M.A.C.M.A.No.1391 of 2012


JUDGEMENT:

The appellant is the Claimant in M.V.O.P.No.85 of 2006 on the

file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- II Additional District

Judge, West Godavari District, Eluru 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 by praying the Tribunal to

award an amount of Rs.1,25,000/- towards compensation to the

injuries sustained by the petitioner in a Motor Vehicle Accident

occurred on 12.09.2002.

4. The case of the claimant is that on 12.09.2002 at about 4.00

p.m. while the petitioner was going on his TVS Moped bearing

No.AEP 8212 and reached near Devulapalli village, the driver of

APSRTC bus bearing No.AP 10Z 6480 drove the same in a rash VGKRJ MACMA 1391 of 2012 Page 2 of 8 Dt:03.03.2023

and negligent manner and dashed against the petitioner, resulting

which the petitioner sustained multiple injuries and the petitioner

claimed an amount of Rs.1,25,000/- towards compensation.

5. The first respondent filed memo adopting the written statement

filed by the second respondent. The second respondent filed written

statement denying the claim application and contended that the

claimant is not entitled any compensation and the second

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 petitioner/injured sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident on 12.09.2002 due to rash and negligent driving of the APSRTC Bus bearing No.AP 10 Z 6480, driven by its driver/ 1st respondent?

ii. Whether the petitioner is entitled to claim compensation, if so, to what amount and from which of the respondents?

iii. To what relief?

 VGKRJ                                            MACMA 1391 of 2012
Page 3 of 8                                      Dt:03.03.2023

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

and Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 and Ex.X1 were marked. On behalf of

respondents RW1 was examined, no documents 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.15,000/- 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 points for consideration are:

1. Whether the Order of Tribunal needs any interference?

2. Whether the claimant is entitled for enhancement of claim as prayed for?

11. POINT Nos.1 and 2 :-

The case of the petitioner is that on 12.09.2002 at about 4.00

p.m. when the petitioner was going on a TVS Moped bearing

No.AEP 8212, the 1st respondent, being driver, drove the APSRTC

bus bearing No.AP 10Z 6480 in a rash and negligent manner while VGKRJ MACMA 1391 of 2012 Page 4 of 8 Dt:03.03.2023

plying towards Jangareddigudem on Eluru-Jangareddigudem road

and dashed against the moped of the petitioner, resulting which, the

petitioner fell down and sustained multiple injuries over his left fore

arm, left collar bone and he was shifted to Government Hospital,

Jangareddigudem for treatment, thereafter the doctors referred to

Eluru Government Hospital for better treatment.

12. In order to prove the claim of the petitioner, the petitioner

himself was examined as PW1. In his evidence, he reiterated the

contents of the petition as PW1. He deposed in his evidence about

the receipt of multiple injuries and grievous injuries in a Motor

Vehicle accident that occurred on 12.09.2002 at about 4.00 p.m., by

that time he was going on his TVS moped, the 1st respondent, who

is the driver of APSRTC bus bearing No.AP 10Z 6480, dashed

against his moped, as a result, he fell down and sustained injuries.

The evidence of PW1 coupled with Ex.A1 attested copy of FIR and

Ex.A3 attested coy of charge sheet clearly proves about the rash

and negligent driving of 1st respondent, who is the driver of APSRTC

bus bearing No.AP 10Z 6480 and the 1 st respondent drove the bus

in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the two wheeler of the VGKRJ MACMA 1391 of 2012 Page 5 of 8 Dt:03.03.2023

petitioner and that the petitioner fell down and received two grievous

injuries and one simple injury.

13. The material available on record clearly goes to show that the

petitioner examined the doctor, who treated him, as PW2 and the

material available on record clearly goes to show that PW2, doctor

treated the petitioner and issued Ex.A2 wound certificate and opined

that the petitioner sustained two grievous injuries and one simple

injury. In order to prove the same, the petitioner also relied on

Ex.X1 case sheet. The learned Tribunal has granted Rs.15,000/-

towards compensation in total to the petitioner/injured, but the

learned Tribunal has not granted any compensation for sustaining

grievous injuries by the claimant.

14. The evidence available on record clearly shows that the

petitioner received two grievous injuries in the motor vehicle

accident. Therefore, an amount of Rs.20,000/- is awarded for two

grievous injuries (Rs.10,000/- for each grievous injury). The

petitioner was admitted in hospital on 12.09.2002 and he was

discharged on 21.09.2002. Because of the grievous injuries, he

suffered with heavy pain and suffering. Therefore, an amount of VGKRJ MACMA 1391 of 2012 Page 6 of 8 Dt:03.03.2023

Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards pain and suffering. The petitioner

also received one simple injury. Therefore, an amount of Rs.2,000/-

is awarded for one simple injury. Since the petitioner was

hospitalized for about nearly ten days, an amount of Rs.5,000/- is

awarded towards attendant charges nutrition charges and

transportation charges. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled an

amount of Rs.37,000/- towards total compensation. Accordingly,

the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced from

Rs.15,000/- to Rs.37,000/-.

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

order dated 12.06.2009 passed in M.V.O.P.No.85 of 2006 on the file

of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- II Additional District

Judge, West Godavari District, Eluru. It is held that the appellant is

entitled to a total compensation of Rs.37,000/- with interest @7.5%

p.a. on the enhanced compensation, from the date of petition, till the

date of payment. The respondents 1 and 2 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 VGKRJ MACMA 1391 of 2012 Page 7 of 8 Dt:03.03.2023

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: 03.03.2023.

sj
 VGKRJ                                    MACMA 1391 of 2012
Page 8 of 8                              Dt:03.03.2023

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO

M.A.C.M.A.No.1391 of 2012

03.03.2023

sj