Telangana High Court
Gosam Sayamma vs Mr. M.A. Hafeez And Another on 7 July, 2022
Bench: G Sri Devi
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI
M.A.C.M.A. No.1572 of 2007
JUDGMENT:
This appeal is filed by the appellant-claimant aggrieved
by the judgment and decree, dated 09.05.2006 passed in
O.P.No.246 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (II Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court),
Nizamabad (for short, the Tribunal).
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties have been
referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal.
3. The claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the
Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- for
the injuries sustained by her in a motor vehicle accident. It is
stated that on 30.11.2000 the claimant, along with others, were
traveling in Auto bearing No.AP 25 U 133 from Navipet to
Binnola and when they reached near Gandhi Nagar, the driver of
the auto drove it in a rash and negligent manner at high speed,
lost control over the same and dashed against a stone by the
side of road, due to which the auto turned turtle and the
claimant and other inmates of the auto sustained grievous
GSD, J
Macma_1572_2007
injuries. Since the accident occurred due to the rash and
negligent driving of the driver of the Auto in which the claimant
was travelling, the claimant filed the above O.P. against the
respondents 1 and 2, who are the owner and insurer of the said
Auto, respectively.
4. Considering the claim and the counter filed by the 2nd
respondent, and on evaluation of the evidence, both oral and
documentary, the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the O.P.
and awarded compensation of Rs.20,000/- with interest at 7.5%
per annum. Challenging the same, the present appeal has been
filed by the claimant.
5. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant-claimant.
Although the matter pertains to the year 2007 and notices have
been served upon the 2nd respondent-New India Assurance
Company Limited, the Insurance Company has not appointed any
Standing Counsel to represent the 2nd respondent. With a view
to put quietus to the matter, this Court appointed the panel
counsel, Sri Kota Subba Rao, as the counsel for the 2nd
respondent-insurance company in this appeal, who after
GSD, J
Macma_1572_2007
obtaining the papers from this Court, advanced his arguments.
Perused the material available on record.
6. The finding of the Tribunal with regard to the manner in
which the accident took place has become final as the same is
not challenged either by the owner or insurer of the vehicle.
7. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned,
from a perusal of impugned order, as per Ex.A3-Wound
Certificate, the claimant had sustained laceration on right leg,
abrasions on back and left fore arm and she was treated in the
Government Hospital, Nizamabad from 30.11.2000 to
04.12.2000. The record also discloses that after discharge also
the claimant has taken treated under Dr.P.Suri Babu.
Therefore, the amount awarded by the Tribunal i.e. Rs.20,000/-
appears to be too meagre. Thus, looking into the nature of
injury sustained by the claimant, nature and period of
treatment undergone by HER and the amount spent by HER
towards medical expenses, transportation, attendant charges
and extra nourishment, this Court feels that in all the claimant
is entitled to Rs.45,000/- instead of Rs.20,000/-.
GSD, J
Macma_1572_2007
8. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A. is partly allowed by
enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal
from Rs.20,000/- to Rs.45,000/-. The enhanced amount shall
carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from today till the date of
realization. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this appeal,
shall stand closed.
__________________
JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI
07.07.2022
gkv
