The High Court · 2025

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DI'VI EADA M.A.C.M.A.NO.275 oF 2021 JUDGMENT: This appezrl is filed by the claimant aggrieved by the order and Decree dated OT.O2.20 19 in M.V.O.p.No.622 .of 'lO 16 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Cum-principal Drstrict Judge, Nizamabad (for short "thc Tribunal"). 2, For convenience and clari$, the parties hereirr are referred to as they u.ere arrayed before the Tribunat.

3. The case of the petitioner is that on 24.Og.2O15 at about

9.OO P.M. near Saraswathinagar u,hile the petitioner rvas travelling as pillion rider on motor cycle bearing No.Ap-2S-AG6 _724 from Nizamabad towards Bhainsa, one Mahindra Bolero Max pickup Goods Van bearing No.TS-O4 UA-2 159 driven 1ry its clriver in a rash and negligent manner at high speed dashed a5lainst the motor cycle in opposite direction, due to which the petitioner, his brother Mohammed Sohail and one pedestrian sustaine I multiple and grievous injuries. Immediately the petitioner was shifted to Government Area Hospital, Bhainsa and from th ere he went to GHH, Nizamabad for further treatment and he u,as treated as inpatient from 24.o8.2or5 to 21.o9.2o15. The petiti.ner incurred huge medical expenditure for his treatment. The Delitioner was a \ 2 ETD,J MACMA No.275_2021 3 student and doing labour work and earning Rs.1O,O00/- per monttt. The petitioner sought a compensation of Rs.2,0O,OO0/--

4. Respondent No.1 remained ex-parte. Respondent No.2/lnsurance Company filed its counter denying the occurance of the accident, age, income of the injured and also contended that the rider of the motor bike was not wearing helmet and has not taken proper precautions to avoid the accident and that he was negligent and caused the accident.

5. Based on thc rival pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal has framed the following issues for trial 1) Whether the petitioner recetued injuies in the motor occident due to rash anrl negltgent driuing of Mahind.ra Bolero Max picleup Goods Vor beoing No.TSO1UA2159 bg its diuer causing death of Mohamnted Sohatl? 2) Whether the petitioner is entttled for compensation? U so, to what exlent and from uhat? 3) To what relief and costs?

6. To prove their case, the petitioner got examined PWs. I and 2 and got marked Exs.Al to A7. On behalf of the respondent RWl was examined and Ex.B1 was marked.

7. Based on the evidence on record, the Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.88,O00/- as against the claim of Rs.9,O0,0O0/. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has preferred the present appeal seeking enhancement. \ .:Tj F-:i,di':F?3:rT.,l' 3 ETD,.] MACMA No.275 2021

8. Heard Sri S.Surender Reddy, learned co rnsel for the appellant and Sri N.S.Bhaskar Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant has subrritted that the Tribunal has au,arded very meager amount of Rs.88.O0O/- towards compensation as against the claim of Rs.2,00,00(r/ -. He further submitted that the Tribunal failed lo consider t.he g-ievous injuries sustained by th<r pe titioner and thc medical expen{jcs incurred by him and that rhe petitioner is still sulfering fror the impact of accident and therefore, he prayed to enhance the co npensation.

10. l,earned cr>unsel for respondcnt No.2 has sut mttted that the Tribunal has granted just compensation and that thcre is no need to interfere u,ith the same. Therefore, he prayed to dismiss the appeal. I 1. Based on the above rivai contentions, this C tr-t rt frames the following points for determination: a) Whether tlrc claintant is entiderl for enhf, nccment of conLpensqtion as praged for? If so to whot ertelt.) b) Whether the order and decree oJ the Tibun, rl rreed any interference? c) 'fo Luhqt relief

12. POrt{T NO.1: a). PW. 1 before the trial Court has reitera ed the contents of the petition in his Chief examination. The case ,rf the petitioner i i 4 ETD,J MACMA No.275 2021 is that the petitioner sustained grievous injuries, fractures and underwent treatment at Government Hospital, Bhainsa and also at Government Hospital, Nizamabad. Ex.A3 is the injury certihcate b) A perusal of the said Ex.A3 issued by Civil Assistant Surgeon at Government Hospital, Nizamabad, reveals that the pe titioner has sustarned fracture of middie 1 / 3ra of right femur. He hled O.P. ticket issued by District Government Hospital, Nizamabad, u,herein he was prescribed with certain medication and it also discloses that the petitioner was treated for his fracture with Open Reduction and Intcrnal Fixation (ORIF). In view of the injuries sustained by the petitioner and the treatment underwent by him, it is opined that the petitioner is entitled to an arnount of Rs.SO,OOO/- towards pain and suffering. The petitioner underwent treatment at Government Hospital, u,hich is at free of cost but there would be certain incidental charges like transport, attendant charges, extra nourishment and other miscellaneous expenditure. The petitioner has not filed any other medical bills. It is opined that the petitioner is entitled to another Rs.5O,O00/- towards medical expenses, attendant charges, transportation, extra nourishment and o[her incidental expenditure. The petitioner was aged about 16 years. Though they have stated that the petitioner was attending labour works no proof can be expected in tJ.is regard. On a reasonable hypothesis, the Tribunal has awarded I I I lBGFS?FY ;.. l.- t ,t/ 5 ETD,J MACMA No.275 2021 Rs.18,000/- tolvards loss of earnings and the same is upheld to be proper in this case. c). It is held thaL the claimant is entitled t,) enhancement of compensation up to Rs.1,18,000/- while the Tribr-rnal has granted Rs.88,00O/-. Hence, point No.1 is ansu,ered accordingly.

13. POINT NO.2: in view of the hnding arrived under point No. , it is held that the order and decree passed by the Tribunal neccl ro be modified 'a,ith regard to the quantum of compensation. l'his Court has enhanced the compensation to Rs.1,18,OOO/ from that oi Rs.88,000/- au,arded by rhe Tribunal. L4. PIOINT NO.3: ln the result, M.A.C.M.A filed by the cla m;rnl is partly allowed, modifying the order dated 07.02.2019 in M.V.O .p.No.622 of 2016 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims .l.ribr_rnal-Cum- Principal District Judge, Nizzrmabad, enhancing the r;ompensation from Rs.8S,OOOl- to Rs.1,18,000/ and the enha rcr:d amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 7 .S % per a nnum from the date of claim petition till realization. However, thr interest for the period of delay, if any, is forfeited. The respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed to deposit the compensation amount with :rccmed interest u,ithin a period of two months from the date of re( eipt of a copy of this judgment after deducting the amount if any airezrC,, .leposited. \ 6 ETD,J MACMA No.275 2021 On such deposit, the appellant is cntitled to withdraw the said amount without furnishing any security. No costs. Miscelianeous petitions, pending if any, in this appeal, shall stand closed. To, i/TRUE COPY// SD/- A.V.S. PRASAD DEPUW REGrfIeo^ ,/ SECTION OFFICER

1. The Chairman Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - Cum - Principal District Judge, Nizamabad. (With Records)

2. One CC to M/S. S SURENDER REDDY Advocate [OPUC]

3. One CC to SRl. N.S. BHASKAR RAO Advocate IOPUCI

4. Two CD Copies r MMT / : - \i (:r,tl \. '. +. qrP 2rt5 \..r5 1 'n. -! i:- 2 DRAFTS HIGH COURT DATED:2410412025 JUDGMENT + DECREE MACMA.N o.275 oI 2021 PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS / ,/ / + 6./<l/. 134441 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA MOTOR ACC IDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 275 OF 2021 Between: lvlohammed lsmail, S/o Abdul Sattar Bhai or Abdul Sattar, Age: 2'1 years, Occ: Student, Milk vendor and labour on contract basis, Rl/o. H.No.7-14-192134, Habeebnagar, Kacchi colony, Nizamabad. (Declare as Major in l.A.No. 1168 of 2019, dated 13/09/2019) .,.APPELLANT/ PETITONER AND 'I . M/s Vaishnovi Constructions and Another, Represented by A. Muralidhar Reddy, Age: Major, Owner of Mahindra Bolero Max pickup Goods Van Bearing No.TS-01 -UA-21 59, R/o. H. No.'t -3-1 55, Shastrinagar, Nirmal, Adilabad District.

2. Bajaj Alliazn General lnsurance Company Limited, Hyderabad. Represented by its Branch Manager, Branch Office, 5-6-589, Sai Anasuya Complex, Above IVahija Chit Fund Company Limited, Saraswathinagar, Hyderabad Road, Nizamabad. (Policy Cover Note No. DY1302075651 vaild from 2310412015 to 2210412016) ..,RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS Appeal filed Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the Order and decree in M.V.O.P.No.622 of 2016 dated. 0710212019 on the file of the Court of the Chairman Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - Cum - Principal District Judge, N izamabad. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Tribunal and the material papers in the MVOP and upon hearing the arguments of M/S S SURENDER REDDY, Advocate for the Appellants and N S BHASKAR RAO, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2 and of NONE APPEARED for the Respondent No.1. ,r::ir_ +ra-?F..r-- This court doth Order and Decree as follows

1. That the Motor Accident Civil lrlliscellaneous appeal be and hereby is parfly allowed by enhancing the compensation from Rs.88,0001 to Rs. 1 ,1 9,0001 ;

2. That the enhanced amount of compensation shall carry interest @ 1.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization;

3. That the interest for the period of delay, if any be and hereby is forfeited; 4. That the respondent Nos.1 and 2 be and hereby are dlrected to deposit the compensation amount with accrued interest with in a pr:riod of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment after deducting the amount if any already deposited;

5. That on such deposit, the appellant be and hereby is enti ed to withdraw the said amount without furnishing any security;

6. That save as aforesaid, the decree of the Tribunal Sha I stands Confirmed in all other respects; and

7. That there be no order as to costs in this appeal To, //TRUE COPY// SD/- A.V.S. PRASAD DEPUTY RE6ISTRAR hr 'L sEcTtpN OFFTCER '1 . The Chairman Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - C;m - Judge, Nizamabad. Principal District

2. Two CD Copies MMT HIGH COURT DATED:2410412025 DECREE MACMA.N o.275 of 2021 PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS 4 1/ f /s .t