Telangana High Court
United India Insurnce Co. Ltd., vs B.Shivanand And Another on 19 February, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
M.A.C.M.A.No.2069 OF 2015
AND
X-OBJECTION.No.39 OF 2023
COMMON JUDGMENT:
M.A.C.M.A.No.2069 of 2015 is filed by the Insurance
Company aggrieved by the Award, dated 29.06.2015, passed
by the M.A.C.T.-cum-II Additional District Judge (FTC), at
Nizamabad in O.P.No.276 of 2008. The claimant has filed
X-Objection.No.39 of 2023 seeking enhancement of the
compensation amount.
2. The appellant-insurance company is aggrieved by the
finding of the Tribunal in granting compensation of
Rs.5,28,000/- to the claimant. The primary ground urged by
the learned counsel for the appellant-insurance company is
that there was contributory negligence on the part of the
injured for which reason, the Tribunal ought to have awarded
only 50% of the compensation arrived at by the Tribunal.
Secondly, no proof of income was filed by the claimant to
arrive at the conclusion of him drawing Rs.5,000/- salary per
month. Thirdly, in Exhibit A-6, it is mentioned as 'Bajaj
Allianz' at left top corner where a column is provided for
2 KS,J
'company'. Since it is mentioned as Bajaj Allianz, the amount
covered in the bill i.e., Rs.54,365.00 should have been paid
by Bajaj Allianz. In the said circumstances, the amount
covered in Exhibit-A.6 has to be deducted and the remaining
amount should be 50% of the compensation arrived at by the
Tribunal.
3. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for
the claimant has filed X-Objections stating that the Tribunal
though found that the injured did not work for considerable
period of time on account of the injuries sustained by him
due to the accident, failed to consider granting the amount
for loss of earnings for the said period i.e., six (06) months.
In view of the injuries sustained by the claimant, attendant
benefits also ought to have been awarded.
4. The case of the claimant is that while he was travelling
on his motor cycle towards railway station and reached
Khaleelwadi singal point at 11:00 P.M, the driver of the lorry
bearing No.MH26B4456, driven in rash and negligent manner
and at high speed and dashed against the petitioner from his
behind resulting in the claimaint receiving injuries namely
crush injury to right hand, burst 1st web space, multiple
3 KS,J
injuries thenar and huypothenar spaces, fracture base of 1st
metacarpal, fracture scaphoid, fracture 3 PPX, fracture 4th
PPX.
5. The way in which the accident had occurred and when
the claimant was hit from the back, it cannot be said that
there was any contributory negligence on the part of the
claimant. It is not the case of the appellant that while the
claimant was proceeding at speed and suddenly stopped for
which reason the lorry had hit the vehicle thus there may be
a case of contributory negligence, since there is no such
evidence adduced before the Tribunal to support the ground
of contributory negligence, the same cannot be accepted.
6. Only for the reason that the bill showed Bajaj Allianz
against the column 'Company', the insurance company has
taken the plea that the amount shown in the bill might have
been compensated by Bajaj Allianz, however the insurance
company has not adduced any evidence to show that the
amount has been covered by Bajaj Allianz. The argument
that the Bajaj Allianz might have compensated the claimant
for the said amount cannot be accepted.
4 KS,J
7. Admittedly, as seen from the calculations made by the
Tribunal, loss of earning were not considered. In view of
treatment and the injuries received, this Court deems it
appropriate to grant a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards loss of
earnings for a period of six (06) months and Rs.10,000/-
towards attendant benefits. Thus, the claimant is entitled for
an enhancement of Rs.40,000/-.
8. Accordingly, M.A.C.M.A.No.2069 of 2015 is dismissed
while partly allowing the X-Objection.No.39 of 2023 of the
claimant. The compensation granted by the Tribunal stands
enhanced from Rs.5,28,000/- to Rs.5,68,000/-. The
difference amount shall be deposited within a period of two
(2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 7.5% from the
date of petition till realization. No costs.
9. Consequently, miscellaneous applications, if any
pending shall stand closed.
____________________
K. SURENDER,J
February 19, 2024.
BMS
