Telangana High Court
G.Mahendra vs Shaik Zakir on 24 July, 2025
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA
M.A.C.M.A.No.1459 OF 2023
JUDGMENT:
-
This is an appeal preferred by the appellant/petitioner aggrieved
by the order, dated 12.01.2023 passed in M.V.O.P.No.153 of 2016 by
the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-II
Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short, 'the
Tribunal'), wherein an amount of Rs.7,17,375/- is awarded in a claim
petition filed seeking Rs.10,00,000/- from the respondents jointly and
severally by the appellant due to the injuries suffered by him in a road
traffic accident.
2. Heard both sides. Perused the record.
3. The brief facts of the case are that on 04.11.2015 at about 2:30
P.M. when the appellant was going as pillion rider on motorcycle
bearing No.AP-21-AX-8581 from Shamshiguda to Hi-Tech City, when
the vehicle reached Chandana Brothers and was taking U turn, one
lorry bearing No.AP-13X-5861 came in high speed and dashed the
appellant motorcycle causing his fall and fracture of L4-Transverse
process, blunt injury to abdomen, degloving injury to abdomen, head
injury and other blunt injuries all over the body. The police registered
a case in crime No.973 of 2015 and filed charge sheet against
respondent No.2 who was driving the lorry. Respondent No.1 is the
owner and respondent No.3 is the insurer of the crime lorry. Due to
the loss suffered on account of the injuries sustained in the accident,
the appellant preferred claim petition seeking compensation of
Rs.10,00,000/- with interest.
4. The appellant got examined P.Ws.1 to 4 and got marked Exs.A1
to A12. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 remained
ex parte and respondent No.3 though opposed the claim petition
taking various defences did not lead oral evidence but marked Ex.B1-
certified true copy of insurance policy. Upon examining the oral and
documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded Rs.7,17,375/-
with interest at 6% per annum, leading to filing of the present appeal.
5. In grounds of appeal, it is pleaded that the Tribunal failed to
consider the loss of earning capacity of the appellant at 15% though
the doctor, who is examined as P.W.2, has deposed that there is 50%
disability. The appellant is a lift mechanic and he cannot lift weights
and cannot carry heavy work load, cannot sit or stand or walk
normally. Further, he cannot stand for long periods. Therefore, the
Tribunal, according to the appellant ought to have considered his
disability at 50% of earning capacity. The appellant incurred an
amount of Rs.88,470/- towards medical bills but was granted only
Rs.66,375/- final bill amount by not awarding pharmacy bills. There is
no compensation awarded towards loss of earnings, transportation,
extra nourishment and damage to clothing. The Tribunal also failed to
award compensation towards loss of marriage prospects at
Rs.1,00,000/- and therefore the appellant sought enhancement.
6. During arguments in appeal, learned counsel for the appellant
contended that there is failure on the part of the Tribunal in awarding
just compensation on counts of loss of earning capacity due to
disability, the pharmacy bills, loss of marriage prospects, extra
nourishment, transportation and clothing.
7. Learned counsel for the respondent/insurance company argued
that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and fair and that
the same may be confirmed.
8. A perusal of the record shows that the Tribunal did not award
compensation towards loss of income due to disability. There is a need
to award compensation on said ground. On the basis of Ex.A7-original
salary certificate, the monthly income of the appellant is taken at
Rs.15,000/- per month. The age of the appellant was 23 years at the
time of accident and therefore, the multiplier would be '18'. As per the
evidence of P.W.2, a member of Medical Board at Gandhi Hospital
deposed that he treated the appellant after he sustained injuries in
RTA that his final movements reduced between 0 to 10% and that the
patient was treated conservatively with LS belt with medication. P.W.2
issued disability certificate marked under Ex.A6 which is 15% which is
partial and permanent in nature. The witness P.W.2 is not competent
to depose about the loss of earning capacity and therefore, the
Tribunal rightly discarded 50% loss of earning capacity as deposed by
P.W.2. There is disability for the appellant in sitting, squatting and
walking apart from inability to lift heavy weights. As a lift mechanic,
ability to sit, stand and lift heavy weights is required. However, it is
possible that the appellant can find some other avocation which does
not require sitting, squatting or heavy work load. Hence, the
functional disability is also taken at 15%.
9. The Tribunal failed to add future prospects and therefore, there
is a need to add future prospects at 40%. If 40% of the income is
included as future prospects, the annual income would be
Rs.2,52,000/- (Rs.1,80,000/- + Rs.72,000/-). As per the authority in
Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation1, if the aforesaid
annual income is multiplied with relevant multiplier of '18', the loss of
future earnings of the appellant due to disability at 15% is
Rs.6,80,400/- (Rs.2,52,000/- x 18 x 15/100).
10. In addition, the appellant was awarded Rs.50,000/- towards
pain and suffering for grievous injury and the same need not be
interfered with. The Tribunal awarded Rs.15,000/- for three simple
injuries and the same also need not be interfered with. The Tribunal
awarded Rs.66,375/- instead of Rs.88,470/- towards final bill as per
(2009) 6 S.C.C. 121
Ex.A10. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to payment of
Rs.88,470/- by including pharmacy bills marked under Ex.A10.
Lastly, the appellant is also entitled to Rs.10,000/- towards extra
nourishment, Rs.5,000/- towards transportation, Rs.2,000/-
towards damage to clothing and Rs.50,000/- towards loss of
marriage prospects and mental agony. In total, the appellant is
entitled to Rs.9,00,870/- towards compensation.
11. In the result, M.A.C.M.A. is partly allowed. The compensation
awarded by the Tribunal is hereby enhanced from Rs.7,17,375/- to
Rs.9,00,870/- with interest @ 9% per annum on the enhanced
compensation from the date of petition till the date of realization. The
enhanced compensation amount shall be deposited by the respondents
jointly and severally within a period of two months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this Judgment. On such deposit, the appellant is
entitled to withdraw the entire amount as apportioned by the
Tribunal, without furnishing any security. There shall be no order as to
costs.
Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this appeal, shall stand
closed.
_________________
RENUKA YARA, J
Date: 24.07.2025
ssp
