Smt Yasmeen Begum, Nizamabad ... vs The Depot Manager, Nizamabad Anr
2023 Latest Caselaw 1027 Tel

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 1027 Tel
Judgement Date : 1 March, 2023

Telangana High Court

Smt Yasmeen Begum, Nizamabad ... vs The Depot Manager, Nizamabad Anr on 1 March, 2023

Bench: Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao

                                1                    RRN,J
                                              MACMA No.2743 of 2015



 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

                 M.A.C.M.A.No.2743 OF 2015

JUDGMENT:

This appeal is filed by the Appellant/claimant under

Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, aggrieved by the order and

decree, dated 29.09.2015, passed in M.V.O.P.No.860 of 2012 on

the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (I Additional District

Judge), Nizamabad, (for short "the Tribunal").

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be hereinafter

referred to as they are arrayed before the Tribunal.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner filed a claim

petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988,

claiming compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- on account of injuries

sustained by her in a motor vehicle accident. It is stated that the

petitioner was aged about 40 years with the occupation of tailoring

work and earning a monthly income of Rs.9,000/-. On

26.09.2012 while she was travelling on APSRTC bus bearing

No.AP-28-Z-0403 (hereinafter referred to as crime vehicle) and

reached Sevalal Thanda at Varni, the driver of the bus stopped the

bus to enable her to get down from the bus and while she was 2 RRN,J M.A.C.M.A.No.2743 of 2015

getting down from the bus, the driver of the bus started the bus

negligently, as a result, she fell down and the left side front wheel

ran over her right leg and she sustained multiple fracture injuries.

She was shifted to Shashank Hospital, Nizamabad, wherein she

was treated as an inpatient from 26.09.2012 to 11.10.2012.

Dr. K. Mothilal of Shashank Hospital conducted major surgeries

by fixing K-wires in the right foot. External fixation was also done

to the right leg. She incurred a medical expenditure of

Rs.1,00,000/-. She is not able to attend to her work.

4. Respondents filed a counter denying the allegations made

in the petition.

5. To prove her case, the petitioner got examined PWs.1 and

2 and marked Ex.A1 to A14 and Ex.X1. On behalf of the

respondents, RW.1 was examined and got marked Exs.B1 and B2.

6. On appreciation of the evidence on record, the Tribunal

found that due to the negligence of the driver of the crime vehicle,

the accident took place, as such, the Tribunal awarded

compensation of Rs.1,59,000/- as against Rs.5,00,000/-.

Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed by the

petitioner.

3 RRN,J M.A.C.M.A.No.2743 of 2015

7. Heard both sides. Perused the record.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner was treated as an inpatient for 15 days, but the

Tribunal failed to award any amount under the head attendant

charges. He further submitted that the Tribunal granted a very

meagre amount of Rs.70,000/- under different heads i.e. for two

grievous injuries, one simple injury, and also the pain and

suffering and the same is to be enhanced. He further contended

that the Tribunal awarded Rs.14,000/- towards medical expenses

and the same is to be enhanced. He further contended that the

Tribunal awarded very meager amount of Rs.5,000/- under the

head extra nourishment, and also awarded a very meagre amount

of Rs.10,000/- towards future medication/surgery and the same

is to be enhanced.

9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents

contended that the Tribunal has rightly awarded the

compensation under different heads to the petitioner and no

interference is required in the order passed by the Tribunal as the

petitioner was treated under Arogyasree Scheme. Accordingly,

prayed to dismiss the appeal.

4 RRN,J M.A.C.M.A.No.2743 of 2015

10. Having considered the rival submissions of both parties

and on perusal of the Award passed by the Tribunal, this Court is

of the considered view that the Tribunal was not justified in

awarding meagre amounts under some heads, as such, the same

interfered in the following manner:

Head Amount arrived at by Amount arrived at by the Tribunal this Court For two grievous injuries, one simple Rs.70,000/- Rs.1,00,000/- injury, and also the pain and suffering

Medical expenses Rs.14,000/- Rs. 20,000/-

Extra nourishment Rs. 5,000/- Rs. 10,000/-

Future medication / Rs.10,000/- Rs. 20,000/- surgery

Loss of amenities Rs.30,000/- Rs. 30,000/-

Loss of earnings Rs.20,000/- Rs. 20,000/-

Transportation Rs.10,000/- Rs. 10,000/-

               Total               Rs.1,59,000/-          Rs.2,10,000/-



 11.       Accordingly,     the    M.A.C.M.A.      is    allowed     in    part     by

enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.1,59,000/- to

Rs.2,10,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh and Ten Thousand Only) with

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

realization. The respondents shall deposit the said compensation

amount together with interest and costs after giving due credit to 5 RRN,J M.A.C.M.A.No.2743 of 2015

the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of two

months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The

petitioner is permitted to withdraw the same. There shall be no

order as to costs.