Telangana High Court
B. Lingam vs Maddileti on 13 February, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
M.A.C.M.A. No.1294 OF 2008
JUDGMENT:
1. Appellant-claimant filed this appeal against the Order and
Decree dated 08.01.2008 in O.P.No.489 of 2005 on the file of the I
Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge-Cum-XV Additional Chief
Judge, Hyderabad, where under the Tribunal granted an amount of
Rs.34,500/- towards compensation along with interest @ 6% per
annum as against the claim of Rs.2,50,000/- on account of the
injuries sustained by the appellant in the motor vehicle accident
occurred on 06.09.2004.
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 appellant was working as daily wage labour in a Spinning
Mill. On 06.09.2004 while he was returning from Bichupally after
performing pushkara snanam in a jeep along with others, a lorry
bearing No.AP-21-P-0477 on National High Way-7 came in the
opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner with a high speed
and dashed the jeep. The jeep turned turtle on to the left resulting
in the inmates of the vehicle sustaining grievous injuries. The
Tribunal having examined P.W.1 and P.W.2, marked Exs.A-1 to A-7
found that there was contributory negligence on the part of the
Driver of the vehicle. No reasons are given in the findings by the
Tribunal as to how the Driver of the jeep had contributed to the said
accident. The reasons given by the Tribunal for finding that there
was contributory negligence on the part of the Driver of the jeep was
that the Driver of the jeep was not examined, claimant did not
produce the scene of offence panchanama or the rough sketch to
show that the lorry came in the wrong direction and hit the jeep.
5. The said documents would be of no consequence and the very
nature in which the accident happened would entail the Court to
come to a conclusion regarding any contributory negligence on the
part of the Driver.
6. In the present case, the jeep was hit on the right side, tyre was
detached and the jeep turned turtle on to the left side and the lorry
hit the jeep on the right side. In the said circumstances, since
vehicle was driven on the left side, it can be safely concluded that
the jeep was on the correct side and the lorry had hit the jeep
coming in the right direction. As such, it cannot be said that there
was head on collusion and there is negligence on the part of the jeep
Driver. Accordingly, the finding of the Tribunal that there was
contributory negligence on part of the jeep Driver is hereby set aside.
7. Admittedly, the appellant was working as daily wage labour
and the Tribunal has considered his monthly income as Rs.1,000/-.
The said notional value is too less. In the said circumstances, the
claim of the appellant that he was earning Rs.3,500/- can be
considered to calculate the compensation (3,500x12x15/100x18)
which comes to Rs.1,13,400/-. If the lower Court finds that no
evidence was adduced by the Insurance Company showing that
there was contributory negligence on the part of the jeep Driver,
such finding of Tribunal is unacceptable.
8. Accordingly, the compensation is enhanced under various
heads as follows:-
Awarded by Awarded by
Sl.No. Name of Head trial Court this Court
01. 15% disability Rs.36,000/- Rs.1,13,400/-
02. Fractures 30,000/- Rs.40,000/-
03. Medical bills Rs.3,000/- Rs.3,000/-
04. Loss of income - Rs.3,500/-
for 9 days
TOTAL Rs.69,000/- Rs.1,59,900/-
9. In the result, the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is
partly allowed. Since the 50% of the contributory negligence on the
part of the Driver of the jeep is set aside, the claimant is entitled for
total compensation. Accordingly, the compensation amount awarded
by the Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.34,500/- to Rs.1,59,600/-.
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.
10. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No
costs.
__________________
K.SURENDER, J
Date : 13.02.2024
dv
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
Dt.13.02.2024
dv
