[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Telangana High Court
Nenavath Maru, Nizamazad Dt., vs Mohd. Moosa, Nizamabad 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.733 of 2019
DATE: 03.12.2025
Between:
Nenavath Maru
.....Appellant
AND
Mohd. Moosa and another
....Respondents
JUDGMENT:
Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded
in the order and decree dated 01.08.2014 passed in O.P.No.609 of
2009 by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-Cum-VIII
Additional District Judge at Nizamabad (hereinafter referred to as "the
Tribunal"), whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.83,500/- for
the injuries sustained by her in a motor vehicle accident, the
appellant-claimant has filed this appeal, under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement of the compensation.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 24.03.2009, the
appellant/claimant, a 33-year-old woman engaged in running general
stores, vegetable business and agriculture, was travelling in an auto
bearing No.AP 25-V-1166. At about 5:30 p.m., when the auto reached
Dasnagar village limits, its driver drove in a rash and negligent
manner, lost control, and the vehicle overturned after hitting a
motorcycle, due to which the appellant-claimant sustained grievous
multiple injuries including fractures to both bones of the left leg and
left hand, fracture of ribs and skull, rupture of stomach and injuries
to the head, back and face. She was initially treated at Government
Headquarters Hospital, Nizamabad, and later admitted in Shashank
Hospital where she underwent surgery and remained as inpatient
from 24.03.2009 to 30.03.2009, followed by prolonged follow-up
treatment. The SHO, PS Makloor, also registered a criminal case vide
Crime No.69 of 2009 against the driver of auto. Stating that the
appellant-claimant incurred medical expenditure of more than
Rs.1,00,000/- and suffered loss of income and disability, she filed the
aforesaid claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation of
Rs.2,00,000/- on account of the injuries sustained by her in the said
accident, against the owner and insurer of the auto.
3. Before the Tribunal, respondent No.1 i.e., owner of the auto
remained ex parte. Respondent No.2-insruance 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 auto driver and awarded a sum of Rs.83,500/-
towards compensation with interest at the rate of 6% per annum in
favour of the appellant-claimant, payable by the respondents jointly
and severally. Aggrieved by the quantum, the appellant-claimant
preferred the present 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 auto 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-claimant suffered multiple grievous injuries including
fractures to the left upper and lower limbs, skull and rib fractures,
internal injuries, and remained hospitalized for several days, followed
by prolonged treatment. The nature of injuries clearly indicates long-
lasting physical disability resulting in functional limitations and loss
of earning capacity. Despite the documentary evidence including
Exs.A3, A5, A6 and the medical opinion of PW-2 indicating the
seriousness of injuries and requirement of further surgery, the
Tribunal, awarded compensation only under limited heads, without
adequately appreciating the severity of the injuries, pain and trauma
endured by the claimant, her prolonged medical treatment, and the
consequent loss of livelihood.
7. Keeping in view the age of the appellant-claimant, her
avocation, and the nature of injuries supported by medical evidence,
this Court finds that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on
the lower side and does not reflect a fair assessment of her physical
and economic suffering. Therefore, enhancement under various
permissible heads is warranted to ensure that the appellant-claimant
receives just compensation as contemplated under law, which is re-
assessed and tabulated as under:
Sl. Name of the Head Compensation
No. Amount
1. Pain and Suffering Rs.60,000.00
2. Medical Expenses (including future Rs.45,000.00
medical)
3. Extra Nourishment , Attendant, Rs.30,000.00
Transportation & Incidental Charges
4. Loss of Earnings during Treatment (3 Rs.13,500.00
months x @Rs.4,500/-)
5. Loss of amenities Rs.35,000.00
Total Rs.1,83,500.00
8. Coming to the rate of interest, as the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Mannat Johal
and others 1 and in several subsequent decisions held that the
reasonable rate of interest to be awarded in motor accident claim
cases shall be 7.5% per annum, this Court is of the opinion that the
1 AIR 2019 SC 2079
rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal in the instant case is on the
lower side and the same requires modification.
9. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed, by enhancing the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.83,500/- to
Rs.1,83,500/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of
petition till the date of realization. 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
