The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Respondents No.1 & 2 : Counsel fiorthe Respondent No.3 : SRI T. SANJAY K. SINGH Counsel for the Respondents No.4 & 5 : The Court made the following: JUDGMENT //' l' THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHAS-I IR REDDY M.A.C.M.A.I{o .349 o{ 2OL9 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed by the appellant/ clainri Lr t aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 21.12.20 passed in M.V.O.P.No.332 of 2015 by the Chairman, Motor A( ldeltts Clzums Tribu nal-cu m- Principal Distrrct Judge, Mahabutrr, ear (for short 'the Tribunal").

2. For Lhc sake o[ convenience, hereinafter, tlrr teftics tull be relcrred to as they were arrayed before the TribunrLl

3. Thc brief facts of the case are that on lS.O-(. 2.30 p.m., rvhile the petitioner was travelling in ar No.AP 22 TA 3090 near Kollapur Chowrasta, Niq: drivcr of thc said auto drove it in a rash and negliger 015 at about iluto bearing -l<u rnool, the . manner :rnd dashed a m.)Lor cycle coming from the opposite rlr. ction, duc [o which, the pctrtioner fell down and sustained grieuou ; injuries. He was shifted to Govemment Hospitat, Nagarkurnoo, NIMS, Hyderabad, where he was treated as an r 18.05-2015 to 30.05.2015 and underwent open -r internal fixation surgery with plates and screws fo,. :l the right lemur bone. The petitioner contended tha injuries and permanent disability, he was unable t(, tmd later to paticnt from Cuction and e fr:rcture of due to the rrntinue his I 2 work as a mason and lost his earnings. He claimed a sum of Rs.5,00,00O/ - as compensation .1. The respondents 2, 4 ar,d 5 remained ex pofie. Thc rcspondents 1 and 3 filed their counters denying the allegations and contending that the accident occurred due to the negligencc of the motorcyclist. and that the compcnsation claimecl was cxcessive.

5. The Tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary eyidence adduced on both sides, treld that the accident occurred due to the composite negligence of the auto driver ancl thc motorcyclist in equal proportion. The Tribunal awafded a total compensation of Rs.2,8O,000/- with interest at 9%o per annum from the date of petition till realization, dirccting respondent No.3/Insurance Company to pay ti're amount and granting liberty [o recover 507o of the same from respondent Nos.4 and 5, the rider and owner of the motorcycle respectively.

6. Heard both sides and perused the record

7. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and not comrnensurate with ttre gravity of injuries sustained by the claimant. He contends that the petitioner sustained a compound fracture of the right femur bone, was treated at NIMS Hospital as l rn inp.lLient, undcnvent surgery with insertion c implants, and thc disability rvas assessed at 6lyo by the Mr:r i :Ll Board. It is submittcd thar the amount awarded under the he rls of pair.r and suffcring and rnedic:al expenses is wholly inaderlt: 1r and that the Tribunal lailed to consider thc future medical cx x)nses [owarrds rcmovzrl o[ implants, which lr-re not covered L r ler Aarogyasri schcmc. It is lhercfore prayed to enhance lh€ cornpensation suitably.

8. On the other hand, the tearned Standing ( ounsel for the Insurance Companv supported the award passed ly the Tribunal and submitted that the compensation grantrr is just and lcasonable and that the Tribuna1 had righLl.' essessed the (luantum. It is also submiLted that the pr:tir rner rect'ived treatment llnder Aaros,asri scheme and hence, ther .was no scope [c-rr awarding any furtier amount under Lhe he L,] of meciical expenses.

9. Thc lrnding of the Tribunal with regard to [l.t occurrence of lhe accidcnt aud the rash an.l negligent driving o' Jre vehicles is based on evidence and does not call for any interf( I ::rce. The only question that arises for consideration in this appeal s whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal isjust ald re tsonable. I I l, 4

10. The evidence of P.W.1, couplcd rvith Dxs.A3, A5 and A7 to 49, clearly establishes that the petitroner sustained grievous inluries, including fracture of the right femur bone, amd undenvcnt surgery u,ith fixation of implants. The petitioner was an inpatienr for more than ten days and was advised prolonged rest and physiotherapy. The disability cer:.ificate issucd by the Medical Board indicates 6lyo permanent disability. Having regard to thc nature of injuries, duration of treatment and the extent of permancnt disability, the compensation awarded under the head of pain and suffering at Rs.80,000/- is inadequate. This Court is of thc view that a sum of Rs.1,5C;000,/- would be a just and reasonable amount under the said head.

11. Insofar as the medical experises are concerned, though the treatment was taken under Aarogyasri scheme, Ote evidence on record sho$'s that the petitioner had to purchase medicines and medica-l aids from outside and that future surgery lor removal of implants would be required, which would cost about Rs-50,000/- to Rs.60,000/-. Thc Tribunal clubbed all these aspects and awarded a consolidated sum of Rs.1,50,00O/- towards mcdical expenses, transportation, attendant charges and future medical expenditure. Considering the nature of injury, surgical treatment and the likely cost of future surgen/, the arnount awarded under w I 5 thrs head is on the lower side. A sum of Rs.2,7O.Ci )/- rvould be a reasonallle airounI under the head o[ medical rrd inctdcntal exPen scs 12 'l'he compensation awarded towards loss o' trcome during treatment at Rs.50,000/- also appears to be on he lower side considering that Lhe petitioner, being a mason, worr I have lost his income during the period of hospitalization arld re,rr very. Hence, a further sum of Rs.30,000/- is awarded under the r:ad of loss of income during trcatmcnt, thereby enhancing th: total amount under thrs hcad to Rs.8O,000/-. Thus, rhe total cornpensation , payable to rhc claimant is re-determined as follows: Head Pain and suffering Me dical and incidental expenses Loss of incorae during treatmerl t Total Awarded by 'fribunal (Rs.f 80,000 Ar arded by this Court (Rs.f 1,50,000 1,50,000 50,000 2,ao,0oo 2,70,OOO 80,000 5,Oo,OOO

13. [n thc result. this appeal is allowed ,:: Lrancing the compensation from Rs.2,80,000/- to Rs.5,00,000 The rate of intcrest a$,arded by the Tribunal at 9o/o per annum f-, r:r the date of petition till realization and the linding as to ll ) liability of respondent No.3/lnsurance Company to pay the c,mpensaLion I 6 with liberty to recover 507o from respondent Nos.4 arld 5 on account o[ compositc negligence :.rre conltrmed. The rest of the tcrms and conditions imposed by the Tribu nal shall rema.in unaltered. No order as to costs. As a sequel, thc miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- C.DEEPIKA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY'/ SECTION OFFICER To, Pa D s'ir c'1 , i-l#d'r$.'t-tt*;;fril#-;# GE/PSL q I 6 .1.-a'-.- -. .) ^i .: U/' -) ) t\ 't/.t' tts rut C, ,/ -:* -'- HIGH COURT DATED:10/1'l /2025 JUDGMNET MACMA.No.349 of 2019 ALLOWNG THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS & )6 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TETANGANA AT HYDERABAD MONDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER - -TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE [ 32961 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY MOTOR ACCIDEN T CIVIL MISC ELLANEous APPEAL NO: 349 oF 2019 Appeal f iled under Section '173 of M V Acl' aggrieved by the order and decree dated 21-12-2o18;;Ji i^'o p r'r" s32016-on the file of the court of the Motor Vehicles ncciientt Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge' Mahabubnagar Between: rrr^aan e/n c2ddemoallv villaqe, E.Balaraiu, S/o Sayanna, Age 45 years' Occ: Mason' R/o Gaddampally villag t""r ri p'rlii uil;, r' 6 r"l"iitr1,'Xi H o-u s1 n g Bb a ro c o I o n v' M a h a b u b n a g a r' ...APPELLANT/CLAIMANT ANO 1 2 J B.Ramulu, s/o Chandraiah, Age - 30years' Occ;.{u19 Driver r/o Gaddampally ili]61i,ffi s."tkii"i6t tvti"o"tl Maha6ubnasar District Bankala Ramulu, s/o Narasimha' Ag^e- Major' O"9-,,py.nt'of the Auto No- AP '"Chenniram village' Gopalpet Mandal' 22 TA 3090, rlo n.ruo i:zE',' Mahabubnagar District The New lndia ASsurance co.Ltd.,, represented by its Manager' opp- Modern High School' Mahabubnagar' n * " 4 Ylllii: 3:1ffi :! ::'i :3"T: R :[ ]?: ;,1[3f [h 3"'"; Hfi !il] l3tl l{;l" hluralidhar Mitidudi' s/o M.Raghu, Age -^M3lol' r/o H No 1B-79' Sanlay Nagar 6;i;;;, N;s';;Lr-,-*ol, Mahabubnasar District' (Resoondents No.2,4 & 5 remained exparte and did-not contest the claim in ine cburt below. Hence, tne"V'ile'-"iaidoniy a proforma parties and no notice ii';#;;;ri; ...RESpoNDENrs Appeal filed under Section 173 of M V Act' aggrieved by the order and decree dated 21-12-2018 passed in O P No 332/2015 on the file of the court of the Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge' them in this'appeal) Mahabubnagar' This appeal coming on for hearing and upon pert;ing the grounds of appeal, the judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and t e material papers in the case and upon hearing the argument of SRI K. \'I NKATESH GUPTA, Advocate for the Appellants and none appeared for Responrl, nt No.1 & 2 and SRI T.SANJAY K. SINGH, Advocate appeared for Respondent Nr: I and none appeared for Respondent No.4 & 5. Thb Court doth Order and Decree as folloars: 1- That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appe; be and rs hereby allowed.

2. That the compensation amount be and is herr by enhanced from Rs.2,80,000/- to Rs 5,00,000/-

3. That the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal at g,l per annum from the date of petition till realization and the finding as to the ability of respondent No.3/lnsurance Company to pay the compensation rrr th liberty to recover 50% from respondent Nos.4 and 5 on account of conl osite negligence are confirmed.

4. That the rest of the terms and conditions imposed t 7 the Tribunal shall remain unaltered.

5. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. SD/- C.DEEPIKA ASSI, iTANT REGISTRAR ;ECTION OFFICER Claims Tribunal-crlr-Principal District lfirue Copyll To

1. The Motor Vehicles Accidents Judge, Mahabubnagar. (with record, if any).

2. fwo CD Copies GE o I t HIGH COURT DATED:10/11/2025 DECREE MACMA.No.349 of 2019 ALLOWING THE MACMAWITHOUT COSTS