P. N. Krishna Murthy vs M/S. Mspl Limited
2023 Latest Caselaw 3868 Tel

     THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
                     AND
     THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI
                     M.A.C.M.A.No.3119 OF 2018

JUDGMENT:(per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHY)

      The present appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant

assailing the decree and order, dated 12.01.2017 passed by the

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-Cum-XXV Additional Chief

Judge, City Civil Court, at Hyderabad (for short "the Tribunal")

in M.V.O.P.No.1335 of 2009.


2.    Vide the impugned award, the Tribunal has awarded the

compensation of Rs.4,53,100/- with simple interest @ 8% per

annum from 22.09.2015 till the date of decree and 6% per

annum from the date of decree till the date of payment. It is this

award which has been challenged in the present appeal.


3.    It is the case, where the injurer/claimant was working as

the Deputy General Manager in the 1st respondent-company. He

met with an accident on 09.04.2007. While the injurer/claimant

was traveling in a Scorpio van on the date of accident, it was hit

by the lorry bearing registration No.AP-29-T-3535. The matter

was reported to the Police Station at Sadasivanagar P.S. and the

Police of Sadasivanagar P.S. registered a case in Crime

No.51/2007 under Sections 304-A and 337 of IPC. The 2 PSK,J & NTR,J MACMA.No.3119 of 2018

respondent No.2 is the insurer of the said Scorpio Vehicle in

which the claimant was travelling which is bearing No.KA-35-

MA-9900. As a result of the said accident, the claimant suffered

grievous head injury. There was diffusive axonal injury, fracture

of right clavicle and laceration over left frontal region, laceration

over right side below chin and laceration over right elbow. There

were three simple injuries and two grievous injuries suffered by

the claimant.

4. The Claimant underwent treatment as in-patient in

Yashoda Hospital for a period of 41 long days. He was working

in the capacity of the Deputy General Manager and was drawing

monthly salary of Rs.87,700/- as mentioned in Ex.A7 i.e. salary

certificate of the injurer/claimant. After recording of the

evidence, the Tribunal awarded Rs.30,000/- towards simple

injuries at Rs.10,000/- for each of the three simple injuries and

Rs.40,000/- towards grievous injuries at Rs.20,000/- for each of

the two grievous injuries. In addition, the claimant was awarded

Rs.1,00,000/- towards pain and suffering and also in addition

the claimant was awarded Rs.10,000/- towards transportation

and Rs.10,000/- towards extra nourishment. However, there

was an amount of Rs.2,63,100/- towards loss of salary during

the period of treatment. Thus, the total compensation awarded 3 PSK,J & NTR,J MACMA.No.3119 of 2018

was Rs.4,53,100/-. It is this award which is being under

challenge by the injurer/claimant seeking for further

enhancement of the compensation.

5. The learned counsel for the claimant referred to the

medical evidence produced during the course of the trial, where

Dr. Y. Venkatesh, Chief Consultant Neuro Surgeon at Yashoda

Hospital, Malakpet, Hyderabad was examined as P.W-2 and Dr.

Srikanth Jawalkar, Consultant Neuro Surgeon at Yashoda

Hospital also was examined as P.W-3. Both of them proved the

nature of injuries suffered by the claimant and also proved the

disability which the claimant suffered of diffusive oxonal injury

and the other injuries suffered by the claimant on his head. The

claimant suffered from hearing impairment and also there was

speech impairment. Both the doctors have proved the nature of

disability that the claimant has and both of them established the

fact, that there was a loss of hearing capacity and also there was

difficulty for the claimant to speak clearly. This element of

evidence was not duly considered by the Tribunal while

quantifying the compensation and it was for these reasons, the

claimant has filed the present appeal for quantification of the

compensation.

                                   4                     PSK,J & NTR,J
                                                 MACMA.No.3119 of 2018

6. According to the learned counsel for the claimant, the

nature of injury caused as a result of the accident is of

permanent in nature, which has also been accepted by two

doctors i.e. P.Ws-2 and 3. It was also the contention of the

claimant that, after being in employment for nine years,

ultimately he had resigned from his employment, because of his

suffering. Thus, the compensation has to be suitably enhanced.

7. After careful consideration of the entire case, Sri A.

Ramakrishna Reddy, learned panel lawyer for respondent No.2

was directed to enter appearance and assist the Court.

8. Per Contra the learned counsel for respondent No.2-

Insurance Company contented that the amount of compensation

has been awarded after due consideration of the entire evidence

and as such there is no scope for enhancement. He further

drew the attention to the evidence which has come on record

and which is not in dispute, so far as there being no loss of

earning capacity and so far as the injurer/claimant is

concerned. As a result of the injuries suffered, he further

contended that from the evidence it also appears that rather

than there being loss of earning capacity. In the instant case,

the claimant, in fact, continued in employment for more than 5 PSK,J & NTR,J MACMA.No.3119 of 2018

nine years and in between he also was in due course of time

promoted and was drawing much higher salary what the

claimant was drawing at the time of the accident. This,

according to the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 would

establish that there was no loss of earning capacity as such, and

therefore, the quantum of compensation awarded by the

Tribunal does not requires any warrant inference.

9. Having heard the contention putforth on either side and on

perusal of the record, the undisputed fact as it stands is that the

injurer/claimant met with an accident on 09.04.2007. The

vehicle involved in the accident, the Insurance Company

insuring the vehicle involved in the accident are all not in

dispute. Likewise, there is also no dispute to the extent that

claimant being the Deputy General Manager of the 1st

respondent-company and at the time of accident was drawing

the monthly salary of Rs.87,700/- There is also no dispute to

the fact that, even after the accident and releasing of the

claimant from the Hospital, he continued to serve the 1st

respondent-company for almost a decade and there was a

substantial hike in the salary of the injurer/claimant from

Rs.87,700/- at the time of accident to Rs.1,48,015/- per month

at the time of the recording of the evidence in May 2016 that was 6 PSK,J & NTR,J MACMA.No.3119 of 2018

the period when he had tendered his resignation which was

accepted by the 1st respondent, what is also undisputed from the

evidence and the pleadings is that, as a result of the injuries

suffered by the claimant, there was certain hearing impairment

and there was certain speech impairment as well. Both P.W-2

and P.W-3 have accepted this fact and established the nature of

the disability that the claimant suffered from. From the nature

of the injuries, it is also established that the sort of disability of

hearing impairment and speech impairment both are permanent

in nature, even though there may not had been any loss of

earning capacity, so far as the claimant is concerned.

Nonetheless, the claimant is having bear hearing aid all alone for

enabling him to hear properly. In addition to that he also finds

it difficult in speaking clearly. These two disabilities which are

of permanent in nature would definitely give rise to a great

element of anxiety and agony for the injurer/claimant. It would

also have had some adverse impact so far as the

injurer/claimant working capacity is concerned. Though there

is no fixed percentage of permanent/partial disability

ascertained by the doctors i.e. P.Ws-2 and 3. Nonetheless from

the nature of evidence adduced from the aforesaid two doctors, it 7 PSK,J & NTR,J MACMA.No.3119 of 2018

is established that the claimant suffered from a permanent

disability both on the hearing and also on the speaking points.

10. In the given facts and circumstances of the case, the

injurer/ claimant definitely would be entitled for some

compensation towards the loss of amenities. In the absence of a

fixed percentage of disability being recorded by two doctors

examined, considering the stature of the claimant, first, at the

time of the accident i.e. the rank of the Deputy General Manager

and subsequently also getting promotion to the post of General

Manager, the loss of amenities to be quantified by this Court has

to be commensurate to the stature of the claimant.

11. Taking into consideration the entire factual matrix of the

case, we are of the considered opinion that in the given fact, this

Court assessed the compensation of Rs.5,50,000/- in lumpsum

to be paid to the claimant towards loss of amenities. It is

ordered accordingly. Thus, to the aforesaid accident, the

claimant shall be entitled for an additional compensation of

Rs.5,50,000/- in addition to the compensation awarded by the

Tribunal. In so far as the interest part is concerned, the rate of

interest to be calculated strictly in terms of the rate of interest

awarded by the Tribunal. The additional compensation awarded 8 PSK,J & NTR,J MACMA.No.3119 of 2018

by this Court shall carry the interest at the rate of 8% per

annum from 22.09.2015 till the date of payment.

12. Accordingly, the appeal stands allowed. No order as to

costs.

13. The learned counsel who has entered appearance for the

Oriental Insurance Company at the direction of this Court, for

his able assistance would be entitled for the professional fee as

is paid to the panel lawyer for respondent No.2, which is

expected that respondent No.2 shall honour the same.

14. Consequently, miscellaneous applications, if any pending

shall stand closed.

____________________ P.SAM KOSHY, J

____________________ N. TUKARAMJI, J November 14, 2023.

TU/PVT
                             9               PSK,J & NTR,J
                                     MACMA.No.3119 of 2018




      THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
                      AND
      THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI




                M.A.C.M.A.No.3119 OF 2018




November 14, 2023.
TU/PVT