Tuesday, 09, Jun, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Shaik Ahmed vs B. Simha Rayulu And 2 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 369 Tel

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 369 Tel
Judgement Date : 25 January, 2024

Telangana High Court

Shaik Ahmed vs B. Simha Rayulu And 2 Others on 25 January, 2024

Author: P.Sree Sudha

Bench: P.Sree Sudha

     THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

                   M.A.C.M.A.No.245 of 2013

JUDGMENT:

This appeal is filed against the judgment and decree

passed in O.P.No.998 of 2006 dated 16.12.2012 on the file of

Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional District and

Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Nizamabad.

2. O.P.No.998 of 2006 was filed by the injured seeking

compensation of Rs.4,00,000/-, but the trial Court after

considering the oral and documentary evidence granted an

amount of Rs.43,000/- only with interest @ 7.5% per annum

from the date of petition till the date of realization. Aggrieved by

the said judgment this appeal is preferred.

3. The petitioner examined himself as P.W.1 and marked

documents as Ex.A.1 to A.9. The Insurance Company marked

Ex.B.1 which is copy of insurance policy.

4. In the appeal it is mainly contended that the trial Court

did not properly considered the evidences of P.Ws.1 and 2 and

requested this Court to enhance the compensation granted by

the trial Court.

5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, no representation

on behalf of the respondents and perused the entire evidence on

record.

6. The petitioner examined himself as P.W.1 and Doctor as

P.W.2, filed Ex.A.3 CC of Injury Certificate which shows that the

petitioner admitted at Government Hospital on 20.04.2004 and

found the following injuries:

1. Fracture left humerous

2. Head Injury

7. X-Rays were taken and the petitioner was operated on

30.06.2006 by applying rush nail to the left humerous and after

regular follow up on 9th day sutures were removed and

discharged on 09.07.2004. The injury No.1 is grievous in

nature and injury No.2 is simple in nature and the petitioner

requires further operation to remove nails and that the

petitioner cannot lift heavy weights. Ex.A.4 is the OP Ticket-

cum-Discharge Summary and Ex.A.9 is case sheet.

8. Considering the nature of injury sustained by the

appellant, this Court finds it reasonable to grant Rs.18,000/-

towards injuries, Rs.10,000/- towards pain and suffering,

Rs.10,000/- towards loss of amenities, Rs.18,000/- towards

Medical expenses, Rs.10,000/- towards Transportation,

Rs.10,000/- towards Extra nourishments and Rs.10,000/-

towards attendants charges and Rs.10,000/- towards personal

expenses.

9. Therefore, appellant/petitioner is entitled for the

compensation in the following terms:

1. Loss occurred due to injuries Rs.18,000/-

2. Pain and Suffering Rs.10,000/-

3. Loss of Amenities Rs.10,000/-

4. Medical expenses Rs.18,000/-

5. For Transportation Rs.10,000/-

6. Extra nourishments Rs.10,000/-

7. Attendants Charges Rs.10,000/-

8. Personal Expenses Rs.10,000/-

TOTAL Rs.96,000/-

10. In the result, the appeal is partly-allowed by enhancing

the compensation amount from Rs.43,000/- to Rs.96,000/-

(Rupees Ninety Six thousand only) with interest at the rate of

7.5% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date

of realization.

11. Appellant while travelling in an auto the driver of the auto

drove it a high speed and at the same time a tractor came in a

high speed and dashed the auto. A charge sheet was filed

against both the vehicles and thus there was composite

negligence on the part of auto driver and also on the part of

driver of tractor and trolley. Respondent No.2 is the owner of

the auto, respondent No.3 is the insurer of the auto. As there is

composite negligence of both the vehicles both of them are

equally liable to pay the compensation. The owner of the auto is

having insurance as such respondent No.3 is directed to deposit

half of the amount and respondent No.1 is also directed to

deposit half of the amount granted by this Court within a

period of one month from the date of judgment. On such

deposit, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the said

amount along with interest accrued on it. There shall be

no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand

closed.

_________________________ JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

DATE: 25.01.2024 Bw

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

DATE: 25.01.2024

Bw

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter