Enigala Srinivas vs A.P.S.R.T.C.,
2022 Latest Caselaw 6957 Tel

         HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI

                 M.A.C.M.A. No. 1625 of 2014

JUDGMENT:

Being dissatisfied with the order and decree passed by

the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-V

Additional District Judge, (II Fast Track Court), Warangal in

M.V.O.P.No.179 of 2011 dated 21.03.2013, the

appellant/petitioner has filed the present appeal.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties have been

referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal.

3. Brief facts of the petitioner's case are that on 27.04.2009

in the evening hours he went to Regonda bus stage in order to

go to Mandamarri and stayed in bus stand. At about 18-00

hours when he was trying to board the RTC bus bearing No.

AP 10 Z 3052, the driver of said bus moved it in rash and

negligent manner with high speed, due to which he fell down

on the road and back tyre of said bus passed over on his left

leg. Immediately he was shifted to Parkal Government

Hospital and as per the advise of the doctors, he was shifted to

MGM Hospital, Warangal for better treatment. He sustained

fracture of left leg knee fibula and other injuries all over the

MGP,J Macma_1625_2014

body. During the course of treatment, he underwent an

operation performed by Dr.P.Ramesh, Plastic Surgeon on

15.5.2009. He incurred Rs.1,00,000/- towards medical

expenses and extra nourishment and also lost his earnings

during the treatment. After discharge he spent huge amount

towards physiotherapy treatment. Due to grievous injury on

left leg, he got permanent disability and unable to attend his

regular duties, natural calls even with the assistance. Thus,

he claimed compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- under various

heads.

4. Respondent-Corporation filed counter disputing the

manner of accident, age, avocation, earning capacity and the

nature of injuries sustained by the petitioner. It is further

contended that the compensation claimed by the petitioner is

highly excessive.

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

following issues:

1. Whether the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle bearing No. AP 10 Z 3052 (APSRTC Bus) driven by its driver as per Section 166 of M.V. Act?

MGP,J Macma_1625_2014

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

3. To what relief?

6. In order to prove the issues, PWs.1 to 3 were examined

and Exs.A1 to A8 and Exs.X1 and X2 were marked on behalf of

the petitioner. On behalf of respondent, no oral or

documentary evidence was adduced.

7. Considering the oral and documentary evidence available

on record, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of

Rs.45,000/- towards compensation to the appellant-claimant

against the respondent-Corporation along with costs and

interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the original

petition till the date of deposit or realization.

8. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant/claimant

and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-

Corporation. Perused the material available on record.

9. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of appellant/

claimant submitted that although the claimant established the

fact that the petitioner sustained disability due to the injuries

MGP,J Macma_1625_2014

caused in a motor accident, the Tribunal awarded meager

amount.

10. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of

respondent-Corporation submitted that the Tribunal after

considering the oral and documentary evidence available on

record has awarded adequate compensation and the same

needs no interference by this Court. Therefore, the learned

counsel sought for dismissal of the appeal.

11. With regard to the manner of accident, there is no

dispute. However, after evaluating the evidence of PW-1

coupled with the documentary evidence produced by him, the

Tribunal rightly held that the petitioner has received injuries

in a motor vehicle accident which occurred due to the rash

and negligent driving of the APSRTC Bus bearing No.AP 10 Z

3052.

12. With regard to the quantum of compensation is

concerned, according to the petitioner, he sustained left leg

knee fracture on fibula and other injuries all over the body.

PW-3 Dr.P.Vijayachander Reddy, the then Professor of

MGP,J Macma_1625_2014

Orthopaedics in MGM Hospital, Warangal shows that the

petitioner admitted in their hospital on 27.4.2009 with (i)

degloving injury left lower thigh and knee and ii) fracture of

neck of fibula left and both the above injuries are grievous in

nature. Further he was referred to Plastic Surgeon for injury

No.One and he was discharged from the said hospital on

3.5.2009.

13. PW-2 Dr.P.Ramesh, the then Assistant Professor of

Plastic Surgery, MGM Hospital, Warangal deposed that on

11.5.2009 the petitioner was admitted in male Plastic ward of

MGM Hospital, Warangal with post traumatic raw area over

left popliteal region and regular dressings were done in the

ward and skin grafting was done under spinal anesthesia on

15.5.2009 and post operative care and dressings were done,

for that graft taken was 100% and the patient was discharged

on 25.5.2009. Ex.X-1 case sheet issued by MGM Hospital

shows the same facts as deposed by PW-2. Ex.X-2 discharge

summary issued by MGM Hospital, Warangal shows the same

facts as deposed by PW-3. Therefore, considering the evidence

of PWs.1 to 3 coupled with documentary evidence available on

record, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.30,000/- for

MGP,J Macma_1625_2014

two grievous injuries and for pain and sufferance, an amount

of Rs.5,000/- towards medical expenses, attendant, extra

nourishment and transportation charges and Rs.10,000/

towards loss of expectation of life, amenities, loss of pleasure

and loss of earnings, if any, which appears to be very meager.

Therefore, this Court is inclined to award the compensation

under the following heads as mentioned below:

Sl. No. Description Amount awarded

01. For two grievous injuries @ Rs. 50,000-00 Rs.25,000/- for each grievous injury

02. Medical bills Rs. 1,660-00

03. Pain and sufferance Rs. 20,000-00

04. Extra nourishment, transport Rs. 15,000-00 and attendant charges

05. Loss of earnings @ Rs.4,500/- Rs. 18,000-00 for four months Total: Rs.1,04,660-00

Thus in all the petitioner has been awarded an amount of

Rs.1,04,660/- under all counts.

14. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A. is partly allowed by

enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal

from Rs.45,000/- to Rs.1,04,660/-. The enhanced amount

MGP,J Macma_1625_2014

shall carry interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till

the date of realization, payable by respondent-Corporation.

The amount shall be deposited within a period of one month

from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such

deposit, the claimant is at liberty to withdraw the same

without furnishing any security. No costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand

closed.

______________________ M.G.PRIYADARSINI,J 26.12.2022 pgp