Telangana High Court
R. Narender Reddy vs N. Bhaskar Reddy And Anr on 13 February, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
M.A.C.M.A. No.2835 OF 2006
JUDGMENT:
1. Appellant-claimant filed this appeal against the Order and
Decree dated 17.10.2006 in O.P.No.10 of 2004 on the file of the I
Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge-Cum-XV Additional Chief
Judge at Hyderabad, where under the Tribunal granted an
amount of Rs.52,125/- towards compensation along with interest
@ 7.5% per annum as against the claim of Rs.2,00,000/- on
account of the injuries sustained by the appellant in the motor
vehicle accident occurred on 23.05.2003.
2. The manner of accident and the injuries sustained by the
appellant-claimant are not in dispute and the appellant
challenged the impugned award only on the quantum of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Therefore, this Court is
not inclined to go into other details other than the quantum of
compensation.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned
counsel for the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company.
4. The case of the appellant is that on 23.05.2003 while the
appellant was going on his Hero Honda Splendor motorcycle from
Ibrahimpatnam towards Hyderabad, a tipper in the opposite
direction came in a rash and negligent manner with a high speed
and dashed his motorcycle, due to which the appellant sustained
fracture injuries. The 2nd respondent is the insurer of the tipper
vehicle. It is admitted that the appellant was travelling with
another adult and his daughter who is aged 5 years on the
motorcycle.
5. The Tribunal placing reliance on the judgment of the
erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in United India
Insurance Co., Ltd., vs. K.Anjaiah and others 1 held that when
three adults travel on a two wheeler and if the said vehicle
involves in an accident, there would be 25% contributory
negligence on the part of the two wheeler driver, since triple riding
is forbidden. In the present case, two adults and a child aged 5
years were travelling on a motor cycle, as such, a 5 year old child
would be under the care of parents and she would not be any
hindrance while travelling on a motor cycle.. The said judgment
relied on by the Tribunal has no application to the present facts of
the case since in the case relied on by the Tribunal, three adults
were travelling for which reason, the Court gave a finding that
there was 25% contributory negligence on the part of the driver of
the two wheeler.
2004 (4) ALD 444
6. In the present facts of the case, the findings of the Tribunal
to the extent of 25% contributory negligence on the part of the
appellant is hereby set aside. Further though Ex.A-5, bunch of
medical bills including discharge bills disclose a total sum of
Rs.65,878/-, the Tribunal had considered only Rs.30,000/-
towards medical bills. No reasons are given by the Tribunal as to
why the amount was reduced to Rs.30,000/- when bunch of bills
totaling to Rs.65,878/- was filed by the claimant. On the ground
that no reasons are given for reducing the amount claimed for
medical bills, this Court is inclined to set aside the reduced
amount of Rs.30,000/- towards medical bills and restore the
claim to Rs.65,878/-.
7. In the result, the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal
is partly allowed setting aside the 25% contributory negligence
which comes to Rs.69,500/- and restoring the amount of
Rs.65,878/- towards medical bills setting aside the reduced
amount of Rs.30,000/-, the difference amount would be
Rs.35,878/-. Accordingly, the compensation amount awarded by
the Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.52,125/- to Rs.1,05,378/-
(Rs.69,500+Rs.35,878). The enhanced amount shall carry
interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of
realization. Except the above enhancement, the award of the
Tribunal shall remain same on all other aspects. There shall be no
order as to costs.
8. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
No costs.
__________________
K.SURENDER, J
Date : 13.02.2024
dv
