[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Telangana High Court
M Mallikarajuna, Nalgonda Dist vs M/S V N S Transport, Hyderabad And Anr on 3 December, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
M.A.C.M.A.No.739 of 2019
DATE: 03.12.2025
Between:
Mandala Mallikarjuna
.....Appellant
AND
M/s. V.N.S.Transport and another
....Respondents
JUDGMENT:
This appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
has been preferred by the appellant-claimant, challenging the order
and decree dated 04-02-2015 passed by the Chairman, Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal-Cum-I Additional District Judge, Nalgonda
(hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in O.P. No.37 of 2009,
whereby the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.3,15,200/- with
interest @ 7.5% per annum in favour of the appellant-claimant for the
injuries sustained by him in a road accident.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 27.11.2003, the
appellant-claimant, a lorry-cleaner by occupation, was travelling in
lorry bearing No.AP-09-W-4345 (owned by respondent No.1 herein)
along with the driver of the said lorry from Chengathuru to go to L&T
Cement Factory at Tadiparthy and when they reached the outskirts of
Chennekothapally Village at about 10:00 pm, the driver of the said
lorry, in order to avoid an oncoming car that was proceeding without
headlights, rashly veered the lorry to the right. The lorry lost control
and crashed into a roadside tree. As a result, the appellant suffered
serious injuries, i.e., fractures of both tibia and fibula of his left leg,
fracture of left ankle, fracture of right forearm (ulna), and other
multiple injuries. Immediately after the accident, the appellant-
claimant was treated at Government General Hospital, Anantapur and
subsequently he was shifted to Gandhi Hospital, Secunderabad,
where surgical treatment was performed on his left leg (external
fixation). Stating that prior to the accident, the appellant was hale
and healthy, engaged as lorry-cleaner and was earning a monthly
income of Rs.5,000/- and on account of the accident and resultant
permanent disability, he became unfit to continue his occupation, he
filed the aforesaid claim petition before the Tribunal, claiming
compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in
the said accident.
3. Before the Tribunal, respondent No.1 i.e., owner of the lorry
remained ex parte. Respondent No.2-insurance Company filed a
counter denying the averments of the claim petition and contended
that the compensation claimed was excessive and prayed for dismissal
of the claim. The Tribunal, on appreciation of the oral and
documentary evidence, held that the accident occurred due to the
negligence of the lorry driver and awarded a sum of Rs.3,15,200/-
towards compensation with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum in
favour of the appellant-claimant, payable by the respondents jointly
and severally. Dissatisfied with the quantum, the appellant-claimant
has filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
4. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the
parties and perused the record.
5. There is no dispute with regard to the finding of the Tribunal
that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the lorry driver
and liability.
6. So far as the assessment of quantum of compensation is
concerned, on a re-appraisal of the record, it is evident that the
appellant suffered serious permanent injuries (fractures of both bones
of left leg, ankle, fracture of right arm, surgery, mal-union, restricted
ankle mobility, limping), as evidenced by medical records and the
Disability Certificate (40% disability). Further, the pre-accident
occupation of the appellant-claimant was lorry-cleaner which
demands physical mobility, ability to lift, walk, climb etc., but the
injuries and resulting disability render him unfit for such labour
anymore.
7. Having regard to the age, the permanent disability and its life-
long impact, this Court is of the opinion that the compensation
awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and requires enhancement.
Keeping in view the multiple fractures, surgery, permanent disability,
loss of mobility, and long-term limitations, the amount granted by the
Tribunal towards injuries (grievous injuries and simple injury)
sustained by the appellant-claimant is enhanced from Rs.42,000/-
(Rs.40,000 + 2,000) to Rs.1,00,000/-. The amounts granted by the
Tribunal under others heads i.e., Rs.2,000/- and Rs.2,000/- towards
transportation and food and extra nourishment are enhanced to
Rs.10,000/- each. Further, considering the surgery, hospitalization,
implant/external fixator and nursing, the amount granted by the
Tribunal towards medical expenses at Rs.10,000/- requires
enhancement to Rs.50,000/-. The amount granted by the Tribunal at
Rs.2,59,200/- towards loss of earnings can be maintained. Keeping in
view the trauma, mental and physical shock (past and future),
enduring disability, restricted mobility, loss of comfort, an amount of
Rs.20,000/- can be awarded towards pain and suffering. Thus, the
total compensation payable to the appellant is tabulated as under:
Sl. Name of the Head Compensation
No. Amount
1. Injuries Rs.1,00,000
2. Transportation Rs.10,000
3. Food and Extra Nourishment Rs.10,000
4. Medical Expenses Rs.50,000
5. Loss of Earnings Rs.2,59,200
6. Pain and Suffering Rs.20,000
Total Rs.4,49,200
(Rounding off to
Rs.4,50,000/-)
Thus, the appellant-claimant is entitled for total compensation of
Rs.4,50,000/-.
8. At this stage, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the
Insurance Company submits that the appellant-claimant had claimed
only a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation, and therefore, the
quantum of compensation to be awarded cannot exceed the amount
claimed. However, in view of the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Laxman @ Laxman Mourya Vs. Divisional Manager,
Oriental Insurance Company Limited and another 1 and in
Nagappa Vs. Gurudayal Singh 2, and considering that the Motor
Vehicles Act is a beneficial legislation intended to protect the interest
(2011) 10 SCC 756
2003 ACJ 12 (SC)
of claimants, the Courts are empowered to award just and reasonable
compensation even in excess of the amount claimed. Hence, the
appellant is entitled to a higher compensation than the amount
originally claimed.
9. In the result, this appeal is allowed and the compensation
awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.3,15,200/- to
Rs.4,50,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of
petition till the date of realization. The appellant is directed to pay
Deficit Court Fee on the enhanced amount. The rest of the terms and
conditions imposed by the Tribunal shall remain unaltered. No order
as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall
stand closed.
________________________________
JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
Date: 03.12.2025
JSU
