The Apsrtc vs Moolini Hema Chandra Reddy Ano
2023 Latest Caselaw 5161 AP

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO

                    M.A.C.M.A.No.1461 of 2012


JUDGMENT:

Aggrieved by the impugned order dated 09.01.2012 on the file

of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal -cum- II Additional District Judge,

Madanapalle, passed in M.V.O.P.No.17 of 2009, whereby the

Tribunal has partly allowed the claim against the first respondent,

the instant appeal is preferred by the appellant-Respondent No.1-

A.P.S.R.T.C., questioning the legal validity of the order of the

Tribunal.

Infact, the claimant filed the claim application claiming

compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- from the first respondent/APSRTC

and Rs.2,00,000/- from the second respondent/ United India

Insurance company Limited, Madanapalle. By giving cogent reasons,

the Tribunal dismissed the claim against the 2nd respondent. No

appeal or no cross objections are filed by the claimant against the

said finding given by the Tribunal.

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

be referred to as they are arrayed in the claim application.

                                 2                              VGKRJ
                                                    MACMA 1461 of 2012

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

Vehicles Act, 1988 against the respondents praying the Tribunal to

award an amount of Rs.6,00,000/- towards compensation for the

injuries sustained by him in a Motor Vehicle Accident occurred on

14.10.2007.

4. Facts germane to dispose of this appeal in brief stated as

follows:

On 14.10.2007, the petitioner along with his friends was

proceeding to Punganur in Tata Indica car bearing No.AP20J 2349,

which belongs to the petitioner, and petitioner was driving the said

car in the capacity of owner-cum-driver and when the said car

reached near Vigneswaruni kunta on Madanapalle-Punganur road,

at about 4.45 p.m., the driver of Andhra Pradesh State Road

Transport Corporation (APSRTC), hereinafter referred to as

'offending vehicle', which belongs to first respondent, drove the

same in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and dashed

against the car of the petitioner, resulting which, the petitioner and

other occupants of the car sustained multiple injuries.

                                  3                             VGKRJ
                                                    MACMA 1461 of 2012

5. The respondents 1 and 2 field counters separately denying

the claim of the claimant and contended that the claimant is not

entitled any compensation and the respondents 1 and 2 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 accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of bus bearing No.AP11Z 307 and Tata Indica car bearing No.AP20J 2349 involved resulting the injuries sustained by petitioner by name L.Rajeswaramma?

ii. Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation?

If so, by 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 to PW3 were examined and Ex.A1 to Ex.A13

were marked. On behalf of respondents, RW1 was examined and

Ex.B1 was marked.

                                   4                               VGKRJ
                                                       MACMA 1461 of 2012

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 and the Tribunal

granted an amount of Rs.4,38,905/- towards total compensation to

the claimant against the first respondent. Being aggrieved by the

impugned award, the first respondent/APSRTC filed the appeal

questioning the legal validity of the order of the Tribunal.

9. Heard Sri D.Kodanda Ramireddy, learned counsel for

petitioner and Sri K.Viswanatham, learned counsel for first

respondent/APSRTC and perused the record.

10. Now, the point for consideration is:

      Whether     the    Order        of   Tribunal   needs     any
      interference? If so, to what extent?


11.   POINT :-

In order to prove the rash and negligent driving of the driver of

the offending vehicle, the petitioner relied on his self testimony as

PW1 and so also relied on Ex.A1 certified copy of First Information

Report and Ex.A3 certified copy of charge sheet. The evidence of 5 VGKRJ MACMA 1461 of 2012

PW1 coupled with Ex.A1 and Ex.A3 clearly goes to show that the

accident in question was occurred due to rash and negligent driving

of the driver of the offending vehicle. The Tribunal by assigning

reasons stated that there is no contributory negligence on the part of

the petitioner and that the 2nd respondent Insurance Company is not

liable to pay any compensation. No appeal or no cross objections

are filed by the claimant against the said finding. On considering the

entire material on record, the Tribunal arrived to a conclusion that

the accident in question was occurred due to rash and negligent

driving of driver of the offending vehicle/APSRTC bus bearing

No.AP20J 2349. Therefore, I do not find any legal flaw or infirmity in

the above finding given by the Tribunal.

12. The material on record clearly proves that the petitioner

sustained two grievous injuries in a road accident in question. The

evidence of PW2-Dr.P.V.K.Mohan Das and PW3-

Dr.M.Sanjeevarayudu, who treated the petitioner also support the

same. On considering the entire material on record, the Tribunal

rightly awarded an amount of Rs.40,000/- towards pain and

suffering for two grievous injuries @ Rs.20,000/- each. The 6 VGKRJ MACMA 1461 of 2012

evidence of PW2 and PW3 coupled with Ex.A11 permanent

disability certificate clearly goes to show that the petitioner is

suffering with disability of 40%. By giving cogent reasons, the

Tribunal arrived that the disability suffered by the petitioner is 20%

and by taking notional income of the petitioner as Rs.3,000/- per

month and by applying relevant multiplier of 16, with regard to age

group of the petitioner, the Tribunal rightly awarded an amount of

Rs.1,15,200/- towards loss of earnings for 20% permanent disability

sustained by the petitioner. On considering the Ex.A5 and Ex.7

bunch of medical bills and also on considering the Ex.A4 bunch of

X-Ray films and other material on record which is supported by PW2

and PW3, the Tribunal rightly awarded an amount of Rs.2,73,705/-

towards medical expenses. The Tribunal also awarded an amount

of Rs.10,000/- towards transportation charges, extra nourishment of

food and attendant charges. I do not find any illegality in awarding

the said amount under the said heads by the Tribunal. In total, the

Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.4,38,905/- to the claimant

towards compensation. I do not find any illegality in awarding the

said compensation by the Tribunal.

                                 7                              VGKRJ
                                                    MACMA 1461 of 2012

13. The learned counsel for appellant would submit that the

Tribunal awarded rate of interest at 9% per annum which is

excessive in nature. Insofar as awarding interest @ 9% p.a., is

concerned, since the accident took place in the year 2007, this

Court finds merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the

appellant/APSRTC that the Tribunal awarded exorbitant rate of

interest, and therefore, the same has to be reduced from 9% to 7.5%

p.a.

14. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of and the decree and

order dated 09.01.2012 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident

Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle in

M.V.O.P.17 of 2009 is modified by reducing the rate of interest from

9% p.a. to 7.5% p.a. The order of the Tribunal in all other respects

shall remain intact. 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: 20.10.2023.

sj
                         8                            VGKRJ
                                          MACMA 1461 of 2012

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO

M.A.C.M.A.No.1461 of 2012

20.10.2023

sj