Telangana High Court
Shaik Khadeer Akhani vs T.N.Mohan Ram Reddy And 2 Others on 15 March, 2022
Bench: G Sri Devi
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI
M.A.C.M.A. No.5307 of 2008
JUDGMENT:
This appeal is filed by the appellant-claimant aggrieved
by the judgment and decree, dated 23.02.2001 passed in
O.P.No.201 of 1992 on the file of the Motor Vehicle Accidents
Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court,
Secunderabad (for short, the Tribunal).
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter
referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal.
3. The brief facts of the case are that on 29.05.1992 while
the claimant was going on the Scooter bearing No.AP 10 B 615
and when he reached near Deccan Continental Hotel, a car
bearing No.AP 9 C 2052 driven by the 1st respondent in a rash
and negligent manner with high speed and dashed the claimant.
As a result of which, the claimant sustained fractures and
multiple injuries. Basing on a complaint, a case in Crime No.97
of 1992 has been registered against the 1st respondent. It is also
stated that the claimant was aged about 27 years and was
earning Rs.2,000/- per month and due to compound fractures on
GSD, J
Macma_5307_2008
his left leg, he underwent operations and he sustained
permanent disability. It is also stated that the claimant spent
huge amount for his treatment. Since the accident occurred
due to the rash and negligent driving of the Car, the claimant
filed the above O.P. against the respondents 1 to 3, who are the
driver, owner and insurer of the said Car, claiming
compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- for the disability sustained by
him.
4. Before the Tribunal, the claim against the 1st respondent
was dismissed as not pressed and the 2nd respondent remained
ex parte. The 3rd respondent filed counter denying the manner
in which the accident took place, age avocation and earning of
the claimant and also specifically denied the nature of injuries
sustained and nature of treatment undergone by the claimant.
5. Basing on the above pleadings, the following issues are
framed before the Tribunal:-
1) Whether the accident has taken place due to rash and
negligent driving of Car bearing No.AP 9 C 2052 by its
driver?
2) What is the just amount that can be awarded as
compensation and against whom?
GSD, J
Macma_5307_2008
3) To what relief?
6. During trial, the claimant himself examined as P.W.1 and
got marked Exs.A1 to A10. On behalf of the respondents, neither
oral nor documentary evidence was adduced.
7. After considering the oral and documentary evidence on
record, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident
occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of driver of the
Car and awarded total compensation of Rs.50,000/-. It is also
observed that the O.P. was filed in the year 1992 and in view of
the latches on the part of the claimant, the O.P. could not be
taken up for some time and as such, the Tribunal has not
granted any interest on the compensation amount. Dissatisfied
with the same, the claimant filed the present appeal, seeking
enhancement of the same.
8. Heard both sides and perused the record.
9. The finding of the Tribunal with regard to the manner in
which the accident took place has become final since the same
was not challenged by either of the respondents.
GSD, J
Macma_5307_2008
10. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned, a
perusal of the material on record, as per Ex.A.5, the claimant
has sustained fracture of left shaft femur and fracture of both
bones of left leg. Further, as per Ex.A7 disability certificate,
the claimant has sustained 20% disability. Therefore, in the
facts and circumstances of the case, this Court feels that
claimant is entitled the following amount under various heads.
Sl. Name of Head Awarded by Awarded by this
No. Tribunal Court
Rs. Ps. Rs. Ps.
1. Pain and suffering 10,000.00 25,000.00
2. Medicines and 10,000.00 10,000.00
treatment charges
3. Loss of earnings 3,000.00 12,000.00
during the treatment
period i.e., four
months
4. Extra nourishment, -- 10,000.00
attendant and
transportation charges
5. Loss of future income 27,000.00 1,22,400.00
on account of 20%
disability
(3,000/-x12x20%x17)
TOTAL 50,000.00 1,79,400.00
GSD, J
Macma_5307_2008
11. At this stage, learned Standing Counsel for the Insurance
Company would submit that the claimant has restricted his
claim only for Rs.1,50,000/- and since the O.P. is filed in the
year 1992 and the same has not been taken up for some time in
view of the latches on the part of the claimant, he is entitled to
only Rs.1,50,000/-. Considering the said contention, this Court
is inclined to enhance the compensation from Rs.50,000/- to
Rs.1,50,000/- only.
12. Accordingly, the M.A.C.M.A. is partly allowed by
enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal
from Rs.50,000/- to Rs.1,50,000/-. The enhanced amount shall
carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of passing of the
order i.e., from 23.02.2001 till the date of realisation. There
shall be no order as to costs.
13. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this appeal,
shall stand dismissed.
_________________
JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI
15.03.2022
gkv
GSD, J
Macma_5307_2008
