Nunavath Ramesh vs Satyanarayana And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 3720 Tel

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 3720 Tel
Judgement Date : 8 November, 2023

Telangana High Court

Nunavath Ramesh vs Satyanarayana And Another on 8 November, 2023

Bench: K. Sujana

         THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
                     M.A.C.M.A.No.2543 of 2008
JUDGMENT:

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and decree dated

25.03.2008 in O.P.No.890 of 2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Nizamabad (for short 'The Tribunal'), the

appellant/claimant preferred the present appeal.

2. Vide the aforesaid award, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of

Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) as compensation with

proportionate costs and interest at 7.5% per annum thereon from the date of

petition till the date of realization. The Tribunal directed respondent Nos.1

and 2 to deposit the amount.

3. The appellant/claimant filed the claim petition before the Tribunal

under Section 166(1)(a) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 r/w Rule 455 of the

A.P.M.V Rules for an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only) for

the injuries sustained by the appellant in the road accident.

4. Respondent No.1 is the owner of the Auto and respondent No.2 is the

Insurance Company Limited.

5. Heard Sri Lakkadi Dayaker Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the

appellant.

SKS,J MACMA.No.2543_2008

6. Insurance Company not filed any appeal in disputing the liability and

also not disputing the amount awarded by the Tribunal.

7. It is the specific contention of learned counsel for the appellant that

on 14.02.2003, while the appellant was travelling in auto bearing No.AP

25/T-9671 from Nizamabad to Makloor, on the way when he reached

Sukhjith Starch Mill in the limits of Mubaraknagar at about 05:30 AM, the

driver of the auto drove the auto at high speed in rash and negligent

manner, lost control and dashed against one Andey Prasad in opposite

direction, thereafter, the auto turned turtle and fell in ditch, due to which,

Ande Prasad received grievous injuries and died on the spot and the

appellant herein received multiple factures in the said accident.

8. The Tribunal on consideration the entire evidence, both oral and

documentary, gave a finding that the accident had occurred due to rash and

negligent driving of respondent No.1 and the same vehicle is insured with

respondent No.2, as such, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.20,000/-

payable by respondent Nos.1 and 2. Aggrieved by the quantum, the

claimants filed the present appeal. There is no dispute with regard to the

negligence of respondent No.1. The only issue given for the consideration is

the appellant is entitled for the enhancement of the compensation.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant

received fractural injuries and to prove the same, they examined P.W.2-Dr. T

Narsing Rao.

SKS,J MACMA.No.2543_2008

10. The Tribunal not considered the same and awarded meager amount

as such, he prayed the Court to enhance the compensation. Per contra,

learned counsel for the Insurance Company would submit that there are no

infirmities in the order of the Tribunal and there is no need to interfere in

the orders.

11. As seen from the record, to prove the claim, the appellant himself

examined as P.W.1 and also examined P.W.2-Medical Officer and Exs.A1 to

A4 are marked.

12. To prove the injuries, Dr.T. Narsing Rao examined as P.W.2 and

according to him, the appellant received two fractural injuries and they are

grievous in nature. Ex.A2-Wound Certificate also shows that the appellant

received two fractural injuries and the Tribunal awarded an amount of

Rs.10,000/- each.

13. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.20,000/- towards pain and

suffering for two injuries which is meager. As the appellant received two

fractural injuries, he is entitled for Rs.30,000/- under the head of pain and

suffering. Further, the appellant have claimed Rs.1,50,000/- for his

treatment and no documents filed to prove his claim and the Tribunal not

awarded any amount under medical expenses as the appellant has

sustained two fractural injuries, an amount of Rs.20,000/- is awarded

under medical expenses and not awarded any amount under the head of

loss of temporary earnings. As he sustained injuries, he could not have

SKS,J MACMA.No.2543_2008

attended his duties for six months. Therefore, an amount of Rs.3,000/- per

month has taken as monthly income and awarded Rs.18,000/- towards loss

of temporary earnings. It is also awarded an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards

damage to the clothes and Rs.25,000/- towards transportation and extra

nourishment.

           Heads                               Amounts


Pain and suffering (two grievous               Rs.30,000/-
injuries Rs.15,000 X 2 and two
simple injuries Rs.5,000 X 2)

          Medical expenses                    Rs. 20,000/-

      Transportation and extra                 Rs.25,000/-
           nourishment

      Loss of temporary earnings               Rs.18,000/-

          Damage to clothes                    Rs.5,000/-

                Total                         Rs.98,000/-

14. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed in part.

Accordingly, the Judgment and decree dated 25.03.2008 in O.P.No.890 of

2004 passed by the Tribunal are modified enhancing the compensation from

Rs.20,000/- to Rs.98,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum

from the date of petition till realization against respondent Nos.1 and 2.

15. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severely liable to pay the same

and directed to deposit the said amount with interest and costs after

SKS,J MACMA.No.2543_2008

deducting the amount, if any, deposited earlier within one(1) month from the

date of receipt of certified copy of this Judgment and thereafter, the

appellant is permitted to withdraw the same. There shall be no order as to

costs.