Telangana High Court
Konda Chandra Mouli , Chandra Mohan vs K. Ramulu Major on 29 February, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
M.A.C.M.A.No.1018 of 2016
JUDGMENT:
This appeal is filed by the claimant aggrieved by the
award dated 26.10.2009 in O.P.No.98 of 2003 passed by the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional District and
Sessions (FTC), Mahabubnagar.
2. Heard Mr. V. Raghunath, learned counsel for the
appellant/claimant and Mr. V. Venkatarami Reddy, learned
counsel for the respondent/Insurance company, perused the
entire material on record.
3. The claim petition was filed seeking compensation of an
amount of Rs.5,00,000/- and the Tribunal has granted
compensation of Rs.1,49,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum
from the date of petition till the date of realization.
4. The case of the claimant is that as on the date of the
accident, he was working as Sales Representative in a Cool
Drinks Shop and earning an amount of Rs.5,000/- per month.
On 02.10.2002, while the claimant and his friend were
proceeding to Hanwada Village on a Scooter, near Electricity
Office at Hanwada, one Auto driven by its driver at high speed
KS, J
MACMA_1018_2016
in a rash and negligent manner came in opposite direction and
hit against the Scooter, as a result of which, the claimant and
his friend fell down and they received multiple injuries.
Immediately, the claimant was shifted to Government Hospital,
Mahabubnagar for treatment and from there, he was referred to
NIMS, Hyderabad and he incurred an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-
towards treatment. He also spent amounts towards attendant
charges, food and nutrition charges and took rest for more than
two months. Because of the disability sustained, he is unable to
do work as he used to do earlier.
5. Learned counsel for the claimant submits that the
Tribunal ought to have taken the income of the claimant as
Rs.5,000/- per month and also ought to have granted interest @
6% per annum. It is further submitted that the amounts
granted under the other heads are also very meagre.
6. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that when
there was no evidence in support of the claim that the claimant
was earning an amount of Rs.5,000/- per month, the Tribunal
has rightly taken the income as Rs.2,000/- per month. It is
KS, J
MACMA_1018_2016
submitted that as per the evidence available on record, the
Tribunal as rightly granted compensation of Rs.1,49,000/-.
7. As per the case of claimant, he was earning an amount
of Rs.5,000/- per month. No doubt, there is no evidence
adduced before the Tribunal to prove the same. Though there is
no evidence adduced by the claimant in support of the same,
relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of
Ramachandrappa Vs. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance 1,
where the monthly income of the daily wage labourer is
considered at Rs.4,500/- without there being any evidence, this
Court is inclined to take the monthly income of the claimant at
Rs.4,500/-. Admittedly, the claimant has taken four months
rest and as his income is taken as Rs.4,500/- per month, he is
entitled for Rs.18,000/- (Rs.4,500X4) under the head of loss of
income.
8. Then, coming to the disability sustained by the
claimant, the Medical Board has issued the certificate. As it was
elicited from the evidence of Doctor that the disability of the
claimant will not become an obstacle for the business of the
(2011) 13 SCC 236
KS, J
MACMA_1018_2016
petitioner, the Tribunal has not granted compensation under
the head of disability and this Court is not inclined to interfere
with the said finding.
9. There is no dispute about the injuries sustained by the
claimant. As per the wound certificate/Ex.A3, the claimant has
sustained three grievous injuries and six simple injuries. For
three grievous injuries, he is entitled an amount of
Rs.1,20,000/- (Rs.40,000X3) and for six simple injuries, he is
entitled for Rs.30,000/- (Rs.5,000X6).
10. Basing on the evidence available on record, the Tribunal
has granted an amount of Rs.40,000/- towards medical
expenditure and Rs.15,000/- towards pain and suffering and
this court is not inclined to interfere with the said findings.
11. For loss of amenities, the Tribunal has granted only an
amount of Rs.10,000/- and hence, an amount of Rs.20,000/-
would be appropriate amount under the said head.
12. Under the heads of transport and attendant charges, the
Tribunal has granted an amount of only Rs.10,000/-. Hence,
KS, J
MACMA_1018_2016
this court is inclined to grant an amount of Rs.15,000/- each
under the heads of transport and extra nourishment.
13. In the light of the above discussion, the claimant is
entitled for the following compensation:
Head Compensation awarded
(1) Three grievous injuries Rs.1,20,000
(2) Six simple injuries Rs.30,000
(3) Loss of earnings Rs.18,000
(4) Medical expenditure Rs.40,000
(5) Pain and sufferings Rs.15,000
(6) Loss of amenities Rs.20,000
(7) Transport Rs.15,000
(8) Extra nourishment Rs.15,000
Total compensation awarded Rs.2,73,000/-
14. In the result, the Motor Accident Miscellaneous Appeal
is partly allowed granting compensation of Rs.2,73,000/- to the
claimant by increasing the percentage of interest from 6% per
annum to 7.5% per annum.
KS, J
MACMA_1018_2016
(a) The compensation amount shall carry interest at
7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of
realization.
(b) The respondent/insurance company shall deposit the
amount within a period of (8) weeks from the date of
receipt of copy of judgment. On such deposit, claimant
is entitled to withdraw the entire amount without
furnishing the security.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand
closed.
__________________
K.SURENDER, J
Date : 29.02.2024
gvl
