P.Pentaiah vs K.Vijay Kumar
2022 Latest Caselaw 3219 Tel

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 3219 Tel
Judgement Date : 1 July, 2022

Telangana High Court

P.Pentaiah vs K.Vijay Kumar on 1 July, 2022

Bench: G Sri Devi

                   THE HON'BLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI

                       M.A.C.M.A. No. 2295 of 2015

JUDGMENT:

Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the

Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District &

Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad in M.V.O.P.

No. 69 of 1999, dated 05.10.2009, the present appeal is filed by the

claimant.

Vide aforesaid order, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of

Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation to the appellant-claimant against the

respondents herein who are, rider, owner and insurer of the offending

scooter bearing No. AP 23B 5147, jointly and severally together with

interest at 7.5% per annum for the injuries suffered by him in the road

accident that occurred on 08.01.1999.

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-clamant and the learned

Standing Counsel for the respondent No. 3- Insurance Company. Perused

the material available on record.

The learned counsel for the appellant-claimant has submitted that in

the accident, the claimant received injuries to both legs and right leg was

amputated above the knee level. The doctor, P.W.3, categorically deposed

that the claimant has suffered 60% permanent disability and Ex.A.3, issued

by the competent Medical Board, also reflects that the due to the

amputation of right leg, he sustained 60% permanent disability. The

claimant had to take treatment in the hospital as inpatient for a

considerable period; that he was 40 years old at the time of the accident

and has lost his future prospects; and that he has to lead his remaining life

with the assistance of an attendant. Considering these aspects, although

the claimant has sought for only Rs.5.00 lakhs towards compensation, the

tribunal having arrived at the compensation of Rs.5,43,360/- ought not to

have restricted the compensation to Rs.5.00 lakhs.

The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.

3 sought to sustain the impugned award of the Tribunal contending that

considering the nature of the injuries sustained and the expenditure

incurred by the claimant towards treatment & medicines, the learned

Tribunal has awarded just and reasonable compensation, as claimed by the

claimant and the same needs no interference by this Court.

There is no dispute with regard to the manner of the accident and

the rash and negligent driving of the offending scooter by its rider in

causing the accident. As regards the quantum of compensation, the

claimant was 40 years at the time of accident and due to the injuries

sustained in the accident, he has lost his right leg. As a result, he has

suffered 60% permanent disability which has been duly proved by the

evidence of P.W.3 and Ex.A.13. Considering all these circumstances, the

tribunal has determined the compensation at Rs.5,43,360/- under different

heads, however, restricted the claim to Rs.5.00 lakhs as the claim was only

for Rs.5.00 lakhs. In this regard, it is relevant to refer the judgment of the

Apex Court reported in Laxman @ Laxman Mourya Vs. Divisional

Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited and another1, wherein,

the Apex Court while referring to its earlier decision in Nagappa Vs.

Gurudayal Singh2, has held as under:

"It is true that in the petition filed by him under Section 166 of the Act, the appellant had claimed compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- only, but as held in Nagappa vs. Gurudayal Singh (2003) 2 SCC 274, in the absence of any bar in the Act, the Tribunal and for that reason any competent Court is entitled to award higher compensation to the victim of an accident."

In view of the Judgments of the Apex Court referred to above, the claimant

is entitled to get more amount than what has been claimed. Further, the

Motor Vehicles Act being a beneficial piece of legislation, where the interest

of the claimant is a paramount consideration the Courts should always

endeavour to extend the benefit to the claimant to a just and reasonable

extent. Hence, this Court is inclined to award the compensation as was

determined by the tribunal.

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

compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.5,00,000/- to

Rs.5,43,360/-. The said compensation amount shall carry interest at 7.5%

per annum from the date of filing of the O.P. till the date of realization,

payable by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 jointly and severally. The amount shall