Pedda Bavi Narsimha Reddy vs M/S. Sri Laxmi Earth Movers And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 4380 Tel

           THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI

                      M.A.C.M.A. No.1412 of 2007

JUDGMENT :

This appeal is filed by the Claimant, aggrieved of the order and

decree dated 02.04.2007 in O.P.No.616 of 2004 on the file of Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-I-Additional District Judge,

Mahabubnagar.

2. On 28.07.2004, due to the rash and negligent driving of Toyota

Qualis bearing No.AP-11-W-6560 by its driver, it dashed against the

Maruthi car in which the appellant was travelling, causing grievous

injuries to the appellant and others. Therefore, the above O.P. was

filed seeking compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-

3. The Tribunal, on examining the oral and documentary evidence,

partly allowed the O.P., awarding compensation of Rs.8,000/- along

with costs and interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till

the date of realization. Seeking enhancement of compensation, the

appellant-claimant has filed this appeal.

4. Heard both sides and perused the record.

5. The learned Counsel for the appellant-Claimant has contended

that the Tribunal has failed to consider the evidence adduced on

behalf of the claimant in proper perspective. It is contended that the

Tribunal has grossly erred in attributing 50% contributory negligence

on the part of appellant.

GSD, J MACMA.No.1412 of 2007

6. Admittedly, the Insurance Company-respondent No.2 herein,

except simply stating that there is contributory negligence on the part

of the appellant, has not let in any evidence in that regard. The fact of

appellant travelling in the car along with his friends at the time of

accident is not disputed by respondent No.2. Therefore, the question

of contributory negligence on the part of appellant does not arise.

Dealing with similar issue, this Court in Chakali Swaroopa v. Mohd

Ghouse (2016 ACJ 383), has observed, at para 13, as under:-

"13. No issue has been framed by the Tribunal with regard to the contributory negligence, if any, on the part of the deceased. The respondent has not adduced any evidence to establish the contributory negligence on the part of the deceased. If the driver of the crime vehicle abstains himself from entering into the witness box, the Tribunal can draw an adverse inference. The respondent did not take any steps to examine the eyewitnesses to the accident to establish the negligence, if any, on the part of the deceased. The second respondent has not adduced any evidence much less legally admissible evidence to substantiate its stand...".

7. In the present case, admittedly, the appellant was travelling in

the car along with others, therefore, the question of any contributory

negligence on his part does not arise. Hence, the findings arrived at

by the learned Tribunal that the appellant has also contributed

negligence to an extent of 50% is bad in law, erroneous and is liable

to be set aside. Furthermore, as rightly pointed out by the learned

GSD, J MACMA.No.1412 of 2007

counsel for the appellant, considering the fact that the appellant has

suffered severe injuries in the accident, the Tribunal ought to have

granted reasonable amount towards injuries sustained by him.

8. Thus, this Court feels that the appellant is entitled to the

following amount towards compensation under various heads:

Sl.    Name of Head                 Awarded         by Awarded by this
No.                                 Tribunal           Court
                                    Rs.           Ps. Rs.        Ps.
1.     Pain and suffering                    8,000.00        12,000.00
2.     Extra nourishment                     5,000.00         5,000.00
3.     Medical expenses                      3,000.00         3,000.00
4.     Transport expenses.                     ---            5,000.00
5.     Loss of earnings for one                ---            3,000.00
       month

              TOTAL                           16,000.00      Rs.28,000.00

                                         (however, after
                                       deducting 50%, it
                                               awarded
                                         Rs.8,000/- only

9. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A. is allowed by enhancing the

compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.8,000/- to

Rs.28,000/-. The enhanced amount will carry interest at 7.5% p.a.

from the date of order passed by the Tribunal i.e. 02.04.2007 till the

date of realization, payable by respondents 1 and 2 jointly and

severally. There shall be no order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

____________________ JUSTICE G.SRI DEVI Date: 16.12.2021

ajr