The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Appellants : Sri Y.S. Yellanand Gupta, Counsel for the Respondent No. 1 : None appeared Counsel for the Respondent No. 2 : Sri P. Satya Manjula The Court delivered the following: THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA M.A.C.M.A.No. 1918 of 20lO JUDGMENT: This ;LpJreal is lilecl against thc Order datecl 16.08.2010 in ().f'.No.171.) o[ 20Ol] passccl by thc leamed Chairntrrn, Motor Act iclent ('lainrs l'rrbunai cum VII Additional Disr rit:t and Scssiorrs,Juclge (F.'l.C)), Nizarrabad at Bodhzln. ? Thc l)('titiorr r,,ide C).P.No. 17 13 of 2003 r,r'a s [iic<l b-r, orrr: [3.(]zrnglrclhrrr. clairnrng contpensation of Rs.3,OO.()0Oi lcrr r Ire in.jtrrics sus[:unec[ bv him in a road accider)1 occrrrred olr

13. I l.2OO3. Ilc examinccl hi;nsclf as P.W. 1 an<l also qoL cxzrmined I).W.2 on his beh:r]l and n-rarked Exs.Al to A6 on ltis I;r'l.ralf anri f)x.Bl Insuranci' pohcv ltas markcd on ltr:hzrll-o[ lltc r('sl)ondents riltd lltc trial C()urt also got mark(,.i Ex.C l-crrsr' slrcct. Thc tr-i:rl Court altcr considcring tl.rc oral :rntl do('Lrmerrtirrl cvidcncc on rt'cord, directed the res.pondr:nt No._2 l() lrirY alt :unount ol' Rs.,15,21507/ Qi 7.5o/o pcr ztn trtm Iiom lltc dirtc ol- lihng thc pctition till realizatityt, to lltt' appcllant/ pe titioncr and recover thc same from tlrr rcspon(lcnt No. l Aggrrt'r ed bv the said air.ard, petitioner ti-re -r ir-r lrrcfcrrcrl the prescnt appeal, seeking to enhance thc (:()nl l)cllszttlon amount grar-rtcd by the trial Court

3. Thc trricl facts of Lhe case are that on 13.I 1.2003, the appcllant hcrein along u'ith othcrs n'crc travclling irt thc :ruto rickshall bearing No-AP 25 U 3734 from Varni to lJocllritn. When thcy rcachecl trear Akbarnagar at abor-rt 8:00 l'M, tllt rlrivcr ol' thc auto rickshau', driven it in a rasi-t auC r-rcgligt'tlt manllcr u,ith hrgh spced and lost t:ontrol o[' tht' '"'eiticle, clttt lo s l'rit'h it tunred turtlc. As a result., the pctitirlirt:l- lrtltl rltht r itttlt:t1t--s cll irul o ri('kshJ\\ sustaincrl injurics.

4. The learned Counscl fbr the appcllant/ peLitiont:r tn:rinll' contendcd tl-rat thc compcnsation grantcd bl thc trial Cclurt is verr' meagcr. Thc petitioner had sustaiued scveritl ll-:rcrurcs, unclergonc surgcry and incurrcd mcclical cxpcllses ol'tllrtrc tltan Rs.1,OO,OO0/-. Due to accident, tht: luLure tarrlitlgs aucl amenities ol- the pctitioncr are complctclv alfcctt tl rrtrcl ht' hzrcl zrlso suflcreci permanent clisability. 'lhcrelore , rc(lu('ste.l the Court to enhelnce the compcnsation am()ul.tt gt-antcrl llr thc tri:rl Crturt. -)

5. Learned Counscl for the respondent irlo.2 / Insurance Companv statcd that six persons met wrt I accidcnt and susLained in.irrrics, but the poLicv was existinq only for three members, as such thc trial Court clearlv observed Lhat respondent No.2/lnsurance Company has to recovcr the compe nsation .imount lrom respondent Nr:. . , the lowest amounLs p:rv:rl;lc to any ol the injured includrrrll the trppellant as per and or,rt o[ a]l the au,ards that may be 1t,rs;sed, inctuding the award in this casc, if amounts are payablc, or paid to more lhan ([rrer: injrrrcd persons and awards are passcd. As the appcllant hcr cin dir_l not ch:rllenge the liabilit,, of respondent No.2, the ()rdcr Ol the trial Court regarding liat,ility holds good and it needs rro lnterferencc_

6. Regarding cnhanccment of compensation, tt prove the injurit:s sustainccl by the a ppellant/ pe titioner, ht. 11ot examined thc (loctor u'h, r rrcated him zrs p,W.2. p.W.2 ca[t:i;orically sLated that on 13.I 1.2OO3, hc exermined the appellanl / I rc titioncr and found the foll(,$,ing injuries: t) Itracture of both bones ight fore ar-rn, ii) Fractttre nedial condale of tibict, iii) Fracture ight clctuicle, iu) F-ractur<,. left hcutdial neck, u) Multiple nbraslon-s on ight side of chest, ui) Laceratiotl on nght foot. + He also stated that injuries 1 to 4 are grievous in nature and injuries 5 and 6 are simple injuries. He further staLed Lhat appellant/ petitioner lr,as treatcd as inpatient from 13. I 1.2003 to 19.11.2003. He issued Ex.A3-wound certificatc and maintained Ex.C 1-case sheet. Therefore, considering lhe na[ure of injuries sustained by the appellant/ petitioner, this Court linds that it is just and rcasonable to grarl[ an amount ol Rs.tr5,OOu/ - towards inj u rics.

7. Perusal of the rccord shows that the appcllant w'as agcd about 34 years and u'as doing agriculturc and milk business and earning Rs. 10,00O/- per month, but he has noL examined any witness or hled any income proof t'o substanliate his version. Therefore, this Court considering the age and nature of the work done by the appellant, finds it reasonable to takc thc income of the appellant as Rs.5,0OO/- per month'

8. Appellant/ petitioner sustaincd grievous injuries and "r'as hospitalized, as such he might have suffered pain and suffering and thus this Court finds it rcasonable to grant an amount of Rs.2O,OOO/- towards pain and suffering, Rs'20'OO0i - for loss of amenities, Rs.10,O0O/- for transportation, Rs lO'OOO/- for attcndant charges, Rs.1O,OO0/- for extra nourishment and l Rs.20,0O0/ tor,r'ards meclical expenses. Apart ironr that he cor-rld not lrttt:nd rlutics for at least 8 months, as such this Court finds that it is jtrst and reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.40,O00/ - to\\'ards loss ol income g. Thercfore, 1l're appc llan t/ pe titione r is tl lt.itlcd for the compensation in thc follorving terms: I 2 t L 3 I I J 6 7 8 Inj urics [,oss of Incon'rc Pain :u'rd Sr-tl'l'ering Loss o[ Ameni[ies Dxtrzr Nourishment -iranspg!tatrgl Attcndant chargcs Mcclical Expcnses TOTA' Ils 65,000/ - Rs 40,000/ lls 20,0OO/ - 000/ Rs ?9. 00o/ - 10, 000/ - 10, Iq 000/ Rs Rs 2O,000/ Rs. n,95,OOO/- Rs Rs

10. In Lhc r-csull, ll-rc appeal is partly allowcrl by enhancing the com pe n sit t io lt altrlounL granted by the I |Lir I Court from Rs.45.45O/- t.o Rs.1,c15,000/- (Rupees One Lll<h Ninet-v- Iiive Thousand Onlv) rvith intcrest at the rate of 7..>"1' per annum from the d:rte oI lilrng the petition till the date ol r,:alization. The (Jrdcr of the Lrial CoLlrt regarding liability hokl:; good, as such respondent No.2/insr-trance Company is directt'rl to rleposit the enlire amount ',r.itl-rin a period of one month fi om ttrc date of receipt of a r,'r:Pr ()l- tltis .Jrtdgment and recover 1-(,In respondent 6 - No.1 as stated by the trial Court. On such deposit, appellant/ petitioner is permitted to withdraw the said amount along.,t,ith thc intercst accrued on it. There shall bc no ordcr as to costs. Miscellancous petitions pending, il any, shall stand closed. To, SD/. MOHD. ISMAIL DEP UTY REGIS //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER The Chairman ft4otor Accrdent Claims Tribunal-cum-Vl Additional District Judge, Bodhan. (With records) z o#cct" Sri Y.S. Yellanand Gupta" Advocate [oPUC] : One CC to Sri P. Satya Manjula, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD CoPies KVR DI, Y. HIGH COURT DATED: 0910412025 JUDGMENT MACMA.No.1918 of 2010 i' li, I ,( 'n \ i1 IA , IE N It \l0 2rfl5 ( I ,,.:, ':. '.i:l:--., - ..: - -- .-. .i; / <^i 1:,, PoYlly - ALLowtNG THE MACMA wtrHour cosrs o ,: l)- - G'"'{-xJ "-t) ,(\\v' IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA lvlOT OR ACCIDENT CIVIL MIS CELLANE OUS APPEAL NO: 1918 OF 2010 Between B.Ganoadhar. S/o Ganoaram. Aqed 30 years. Occ: Agriculture and Milk Vendoi R/o. iludrur Villa6e, Bodhan Mandal, District Nizamabad. AND 1 Syed tVohamood Hussain, S/o. Syed Ahmed,Hussain ?ged Major:-qg9i owner of the Auto Rickshaw No. AP25-u-3734, R/o H.No 11-1-8128711, Chandrashekar Colony, Nizamabad. The New lndia Assurnace Companv Limited,, Rep by its Divisional ltrlanager, Divisional Office, Opp Z.P. Otliie, Subashanagar, Nizamabad. 2 ...Appellant ...Respondents Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the order and decree in M.V.O.P No. 1713 of 2003 dated 1610812010 on the file of the Court of the Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Vlll Additional District Judge, Bodhan. This appeal cominq on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judqment andDecree of the Court below and the material papers in t-u MVOP and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Y.S. Yellanand Gupta, Advocate for the Appeltant, Si p. Satyl Manjula, Advocate for the Respondent tru' z ond none appeared for the Respondent No. 1 This Court doth Order and Decree as follows: 't That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and hereby is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation amount granted by the trial uourt trom Rs. 45,4501 t; Rs. 1,95,000/- (Rupees one lakh ninety five rnousand only) with interest at the rate of 7 .5o/o per annum from the date of Trllng the petition till the date of reaiization. ' the.Respondent No. 2/lnsurance company be and hereby is directed .'^n31 :: _19p.o"'j the entire amount within a period of one month from the date of qf coPY of this .luogment and recover from Respondent No.'1 as l-"-":'qt. stated by the tiial court.

3. That on such deposit, Appetlant/Petitioner be and l-ereby is permitted to withdraw the said amount along with the interest actrued on jt.

4. That save as aforesaid, the Judgment and decre: of the Tribunal shall stands confirmed in all other respects; and

5. That there be no order as to costs in this appeal. SD/. MOHD. ISMAIL DtPUTY REGISTRAR To, //TRUE COPY// \gcnoru oFFrcER

1. The Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Vll l\dditional District Judge, Bodhan 2. Two CD Copies ABK Yt HIGH COURT DATED: 091041202s DECREE MACMA.No.1918 of 2010 p""+f\ ALLOWTNG THE MACMA WTTHOUT COSTS \.tcaP?oA #,'-o