Telangana High Court

Kumari Ajmera Sujatha vs M.A. Azeem on 24 January, 2024

Author: G. Radha Rani

Bench: G. Radha Rani

      THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G. RADHA RANI

                       M.A.C.M.A.No.3899 of 2012

JUDGMENT:

This appeal is preferred by the injured claimant aggrieved by the award

and decree dated 07.07.2005 passed in O.P.No.348 of 2000 by the Chairman,

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short "MACT") (IV Additional District

Judge, Fast Track Court), Nizamabad, seeking enhancement of compensation.

2. The appellant was a minor claimant aged about 16 years. She filed a

claim petition represented by her natural mother under Section 166 of the Motor

Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for the injuries sustained

by her in a motor vehicle accident.

3. The appellant was a tribal girl, R/o.Secunderapoor (V) Thanda under

Gram Panchayat of Puppalapalli (V) of Jakranpalli Mandal, Nizamabad District.

As per the claim petition filed by her, on 26.10.1999 at 04:30 PM, while she

was crossing National Highway No.7 in Secunderapoor Village shivar, a Bajaj

Chetak Scooter bearing No.AP-25-A-3826 driven by its driver with high speed

and in a rash and negligent manner came from Dichpalli side and hit the

petitioner, due to which she sustained fracture injuries to her left leg and a blunt

injury to her left ear and injuries on various other parts of her body.

Immediately after the accident, she was shifted to Government Hospital,

Dr.GRR, J macma_3899_2012

Nizamabad. The petitioner thereafter had taken treatment at a private hospital at

Pragathi Nursing Home, Nizamabad, where she was operated and rods were

inserted in her left leg. The petitioner contended that she was working as an

agricultural laborer and was earning Rs.3,000/- per month, she sustained

permanent disability due to the accident. As such, claimed compensation from

respondents 1 and 2, the owner and insurer of the Bajaj Chetak Scooter bearing

No.AP-25-A-3826.

4. The respondent No.1 remained ex-parte.

5. The respondent No.2 filed counter contending that the petitioner was

crossing the road without noticing the vehicle and contributed to the accident

and called for strict proof of the petition averments and that the driver of the

scooter was holding a valid and effective driving license by the date of the

accident. The respondent No.2 - Insurance Company also sought protection

under Sections 147, 149 and 170 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

6. The learned Chairman, MACT, Nizamabad after framing issues caused

enquiry. The claimant examined herself as PW.1 and got marked Exs.A1 to A8

on her behalf. The case sheet issued by Government Hospital, Nizamabad was

marked as Ex.X1 and the case sheet issued by Pragathi Hospital, Nizamabad

was marked as Ex.X2. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced by

respondent No.2. On considering the oral and documentary evidence on record,

Dr.GRR, J macma_3899_2012

the learned Chairman, MACT, Nizamabad held that the accident occurred was

due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the scooter bearing No.AP-

25-A-3826 and that the respondents 1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to

pay compensation to the petitioner.

7. With regard to the quantum of compensation, the Tribunal considering

that the claimant sustained two grievous injuries awarded Rs.10,000/- for the

two grievous injuries and Rs.4,000/- for the four simple injuries. The Tribunal

awarded Rs.16,000/- towards medical bills, Rs.10,000/- for conservative

treatment, Rs.10,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.9,000/- towards loss

of income for a period of six months considering the notional income of the

injured claimant as Rs.1,500/- per month under the Minimum Wages Act.. The

Tribunal also awarded Rs.1,000/- towards transportation and extra nourishment

together. In total, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.60,000/- with interest

@ 9 % from the date of petition till the date of deposit.

8. Aggrieved by the said award and decree, the appellant - claimant

preferred this appeal contending that the Tribunal did not appreciate the fracture

and other injuries sustained by the claimant, the amounts incurred towards

treatment, transportation, extra nourishment, attendant charges, lodging etc.,

The Tribunal failed to award compensation under all the heads. No proper

Dr.GRR, J macma_3899_2012

multiplier was applied and prayed to modify the award and decree dated

07.07.2005 and to award just compensation.

9. Heard Sri K.S.Mahender Reddy, the learned counsel for the appellant -

claimant and Smt.I.Maamu Vani, the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 -

Insurance Company.

10. The learned counsel for the appellant - claimant contended that the

petitioner was working as milk and vegetable vendor as per her evidence and

was earning Rs.6,000/- per month. But, the Tribunal considered her income as

only Rs.1,500/- per month. As per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in

Syed Sadiq and Others v. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance

Company Limited 1, a vegetable vendor is considered as capable of earning

Rs.6,500/- per month. No future prospects were considered by the Tribunal.

The amounts awarded towards loss of earnings, pain and suffering, grievous

injuries need to be enhanced. No amount was awarded towards attendant

charges, which also need to be considered and prayed to enhance the

compensation.

11. The learned counsel for the respondent No.2 - Insurance Company on the

other hand contended that no doctor was examined by the claimant in proof of

the documents filed by her. No future prospects can be awarded when there is

(2014) 2 SCC 735

Dr.GRR, J macma_3899_2012

no disability sustained by the claimant. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal

were in consonance with the Second Schedule appended to the Motor Vehicles

Act under Section 163-A. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.10,000/-

towards pain and suffering apart from awarding Rs.10,000/- for the two

grievous injuries and Rs.4,000/- for the four simple injuries, which was under

the same head, as such, the same would need to be adjusted. There was no

such head as conservative treatment to award an amount of Rs.10,000/-. The

interest granted @ 9 % per annum was not in accordance with the judgments

rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court and prayed to reduce the interest to 6 % on

the amount enhanced if any.

12. Perused the record.

13. The claimant examined herself as PW.1. She became major by the date

of her giving evidence. She stated that on 26.10.1999 at about 04:30 PM while

she was going to Secunderapoor Thanda on National Highway No.7 on foot, a

scooter bearing No.AP-25-A-3826 hit her and ran over her left leg, due to which

she sustained crush injury to her left leg and injury to her left ear and injuries on

the left side of forehead and right side of forehead and on her right hand wrist.

Immediately after the accident, she was shifted to Government Hospital,

Nizamabad, later she took treatment in a private hospital i.e. Pragathi Hospital

for a period of one month and spent Rs.2,00,000/-. An operation was conducted

Dr.GRR, J macma_3899_2012

on her left leg and a rod was inserted. On account of the injury to her left ear,

she was unable to hear properly. She had also taken treatment by an ENT

specialist. She stated that she was working as a milk and vegetable vendor prior

to the accident and was earning Rs.6,000/- per month by the date of the

accident. On account of the injury, she was unable to work and earn as earlier.

14. She filed certified copy of FIR as Ex.A1, the certified copy of the injury

certificate as Ex.A2, the certified copy of the charge-sheet as Ex.A3, the

prescriptions of M.J.Hospital, Perkit, Armoor as Ex.A4, the medical bills as

Ex.A5, the certificate issued by the Sarpanch in proof of her occupation as milk

and vegetable vendor as Ex.A6, photo copy of Insurance Policy as Ex.A7 and

X-rays as Ex.A8.

15. The claimant had not examined any doctor in proof of the certificates

issued by them. However, considering her evidence and the injury certificate

issued by the District Head Quarters Hospital, Nizamabad to the Sub-Inspector

of Police, Armoor which would show that the petitioner sustained fracture to

her left leg, tibia and fibula and a grievous blunt injury to the tymphanic

membrane of left ear, which were termed as grievous and four simple injuries to

her left leg, right leg, fore head and left elbow, and as she was admitted as in-

patient in a private hospital for a period of one month and was operated there

and her fractures to left leg were fixed by inserting rods, as per her evidence, it

Dr.GRR, J macma_3899_2012

is considered fit to award an amount of Rs.20,000/- each to the two grievous

injuries and Rs.10,000/- @ Rs.2,500/- to the four simple injuries sustained by

her under the head "pain and suffering".

16. Even if the petitioner is considered as an agricultural laborer, her earnings

can be considered @ Rs.3,000/- per month considering the date of the accident

in the year 1999. As such, the loss of income for a period of six months can be

assessed as Rs.3,000/- x 6 = Rs.18,000/-.

17. As the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.16,000/- towards medical bills

considering the documents marked under Ex.A5, this Court considers that no

interference is required under the said head. As the evidence of the petitioner

would disclose that rods were inserted in her left leg for fixing the fractures of

left tibia and left fibula and for removal of rods a future operation is required to

be conducted, an amount of Rs.10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is also

considered as reasonable. However, as the Tribunal had not awarded any

amount towards attendant charges and as some of the family members of the

minor claimant might have attended her during the period of her admission in

the hospital and subsequently during the period of her recovery, an amount of

Rs.5,000/- is awarded towards attendant charges. As the Tribunal awarded only

an amount of Rs.1,000/- towards transportation and extra nourishment together,

it is considered fit to enhance the same to Rs.2,000/- each under these heads.

Dr.GRR, J macma_3899_2012

18. The compensation entitled by the petitioner under various heads is as

follows:

           S. No.   Heads                      Compensation Awarded
           1.       Pain and Suffering         Rs.40,000/- (@ Rs.20,000/-
                                               each for the two grievous
                                               injuries)
                                               Rs.10,000/- (@ Rs.2,500/-
                                               each for the four simple
                                               injuries.
           2.       Loss of Income             Rs.18,000/- (@ Rs.3,000/-
                                               per month for a period of six
                                               months)
           3.       Medical Bills              Rs.16,000/-
           4.       Future Medical Expenses    Rs.10,000/-
           5.       Attendant Charges          Rs.5,000/-
           6.       Transportation             Rs.2,000/-
           7.       Extra Nourishment          Rs.2,000/-
                                        Total: 1,03,000/-

19. As such, it is considered fit to enhance the compensation from

Rs.60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal to Rs.1,03,000/- which is considered as

just and reasonable.

20. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A is allowed enhancing the compensation

from Rs.60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal to Rs.1,03,000/- with interest

@ 7.5 % per annum on the enhanced amount. The respondent No.2 - Insurance

Company is directed to deposit the above amount after deducting the amount

deposited if any earlier within a period of two months from the date of receipt

of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit, the appellant - claimant is

permitted to withdraw the entire amount.

Dr.GRR, J macma_3899_2012

No order as to costs.