The High Court · 2025

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE M. G. PRIYADARSINI M.A.C.M.A. No.34O1 of 2OO9 JUDGMENT: Dissatished with the quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Chairman, Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims Tribunal - cum - VII Additional District Judge (FTC), Nizamabad at Bodhan in O.P. No. 140 Of 2OO5, dated 27.07.2O09, the present Appeal is filed by the appellant/ petitioner seeking enhancement of the comPensation.

2. For the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the parties will be referred to as per their array before the learned Tribunal'

3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner filed a petition under Section 166 (1)(a) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation of Rs.3,OO,000/ - (Rupees Three Lakhs only) for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 11.O2-2OO4- According to the petrtioner, on 11.02.2OO4 at about 1:30 PM, while he along with his friend named Sailu were proceeding on his bicycle and when they reached Srinivasa Camp, the driver of the auto rickshaw bearing registration No. AP.9.V. 1869 (herein aJter ca11ed as 'alleged crime vehicle') drove the vehicle in rash ald negligent manner with high speed, came in the opposite direction and ) ) 2 dashed the bicycte of the petitioner; as a result, the petitioner sustained fracture on right forearm both bones, fracture of right shoulder, fracture of right pelvis, multiple abrasions on right hip and other body part and grievous injuries. on head and all over the body. Immediately, he was shifted to Sri Venkateshwara Hospital, Nizamabad, wherein he was admitted as inpatient and undergone several operations. The police Station Bodhan, Nizamabad District registered a case in First Information Report (FIR) No.58 of 2oo4 tor the offence under Sections 337 of the Indian penal Code, 1gO6 against the driver of crime vehicle bearing No. Ap 9 V 1869 and after investigation charge sheet was hled.

4. According to the petitioner, he was working as labour in Municipal water works department, Bodhan and aged about 3g years at the time of accident and used to earn more than Rs.6,000/- per month. Therefore, the petitioner claimed compensation of Rs.3,OO,OOO/-(Rupees Three Lakhs) against the respondent Nos. 1 & 2, w].o are the owner and insurer of the crime vehicle, for the injuries suffered by him under different heads. 5 Before the learned tribunal, the respondent No.l, owner of the crime vehicle, remained exparte and whereas, the 3 respondent No. 2/Insurance Company hled counter denying the averments of the ciaim petition and the lnanner in which the accident occurred, including the age, avocation and income of the injured. It was further contended that the driver of the alleged crime vehicle was not having a valid driving license and APPSV badge to drive such vehicle at the time of accident' The alleged vehicle was not road worthy to ply at the material time of alleged vehicular accident which in itself violates the condition stipulated in the insurance policy. Therefore, the insurance company assailed the liability to pay any compensation amount on the above grounds. It is further contended that the respondent No. 1 alone is responsible to pay the compensation, if any, awarded by the tribunal and the amount claimed is excessive and exorbitant and prayed for dismissal of the case against them.

6. Based on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues: a) WlettLer the accident has taken place due to the rash and negligent diuing of the Auto bearing registration No. AP.9.V.1869 bY it driuer? b) Whether the petitioner is entitted for compensation lf so, to uhat amount and against uhom? c) To what relieJ? I I 4 MACMA NO J4OI O'26

7. On behalf of the petitioner/claimant, he got examined himself as pW1 and also got examined pW2 i.e., the doctors, who treated pwl a,d got marked Exs.Al to A5 and Ex.c-i. on behalf of the respondent No.2/insurance company, none were examined, however, got marked Ex. B1 Insurance policy copy. 8. The learned tribunal after considering Lhe oral and documentary evidence on record partly allowed the claim petition and awarded compensation of Rs.45,O0O/ with interest at 7.5'Yo per annum from the date of the petition till the date of deposit on both the respondents jointly ald severally.

9. Not being satisfied with the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, the petitioner/claimant herein filed the present Appeal seeking enhancement of the same under various heads. 1O. Heard both sides and perused the entire material available on record including the grounds of Appeal.

11. The main contention of the learned counsel for appellant is that though appellant proved his case by adducing cogent evidence apart from relying on the documents under Exs. A_l to A-5; C-1, the learned Tribunal without considering the same \'\rroneously awarded meager compensation amount. It was I 5 MACMA No 340r oa20n9 further contended that the learned Tribunal has not considered the evidence of PWs I arrd 2 coupled with Ex A-3 i'e ' wound certificate, Ex.A-S X-ray films; Ex'C-l medical case sheet and discarded the oral and documentary evidence in toto' Hence' prayed to enhance the compensation on ail heads by considering the grievous injuries sustained and mental agony suffered on account of vehicular accident' Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for Insurance Company contended that the Iearned Tribunal has adequately granted just and reasonable compensation' therefore' the same needs no interference by this court'

12. Now the point for consideration is that: Whether appellant/ petitioner is entitled for enhancetnent of coipensation anount in addition to the compensation o^o,it granted uide impugned Order and Deciee bg th.e learned Tibunal?

13. Before going into the merits of the case' it 1s appropriate to note down some of the admitted facts' The respondent No'2 has not preferred any appeal against the impugned order' There is no dispute with regard to the manner of the accident as the Tribunal by relying on Ex'A 1 (First Information Report) answered issue No.1 holding that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the crime vehicle i'e , auto 6 MACMANo.s.rol or2oos rickshaw bearing registration No.Ap 9 v 1g69 and that the appellant/claimant sustained injuries in the said accident. There is also no dispute that the insurance policy under Ex.B1 was subsisting as on the date of accident.

74. The first and foremost contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the Tribunal ought to have considered that the claimant has sustained multiple grievous injuries and was admitted in the hospital for befter treatment and continuous follow up treatment. but learned tribunal without considering these crucial aspects erroneously awarded meager amount.

15. The petitioner as pW_ t has reiterated the contents of the claim petition and also relied upon the documents under Exs.A1 to A5; Ex.C- I in order to prove the injuries suffered and also got examined PW-2 the doctor, who has treated the petitioner. In his evidence pW2 stated that the petitioner was admitted in hospital on ll.O2.2OO4 w.ith fracture of both bones of right forearm; fracture of the acromion right shouider; fracture of the right illac bone; multiple abrasion in the right fore arm and multiple abrasion of right hip. He further deposed that the petitioner was discharge d on 16.02.20o4 with an advice to take proper medications as the injuries were grievous in nature. \ \ , l I i i I I 1 I l I i I I I I I I I I I i 7 The learned Tribunal considering the evidence of PWs 1 t6 and 2 and Exs.A-1 to A-5; C-1 has awarded Rs' 30'OOO/ (Rs.IO,OOO/- each for 3) grievous injuries and Rs 5'0OO/- (Rs.2,5OO/- each for 2) simple injuries' Considering the nature of injuries sustained and documentary evidence on record' awarding of Rs.30,00O/- for three grievous injuries and Rs.S,OOO for two simple injuries appears to be on lesser side Hence, this court deems fit to enhance the compensation amount by awarding Rs.75,0OO/ -(Rs'25,000/- grievous injuries) and Rs. 10,0OO/ -(Rs' 5000/ - each for three each for two simpte injuries) would be just and reasonable'

17. It is further contended by the appellant that the learned Tribunal ought to have awarded compensation of Rs' 1'00'0OO/- under Lhe head of medical expenditure' It is evident from the record that the petitioner has not adduced any medical bills issued by the hospital to support his contention' however' the learned Tribunal considering the medical prescriptions in Ex'C1 i.e., Medical case sheet has awarded Rs'2,500/-' It is pertinent tonotethattheClaimantwasadmittedaSinpatientinaprivate hospital for 5 days and Ex.C-l shows prescriptions of treating doctor, thus, claimant might have incurred considerable amount towards medicines and hospital charges The amount of 'i ) 8 MCBJ h Rs.2,500/- awarded by learned Tribunal under the head of 'medical expenses, seems to be on lesser side. Hence, this court deems ht to enhance the compensation amount by awarding Rs.5,000/- which is just and reasonable.

18. The learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.3,OU0/_ under the head of attendant and extra nourishment expenses and Rs.2,500/- for mental agony and Rs.2,OOO/_ for transportation, which are reasonable. Hence, this court is not inclined to interfere with the amounts awarded by the learned Tribunal under the above heads. Thus, in all, the claimant is entitlecl for the compensation under various heads, as follows: Sl.No Name of the head 1 2 3 4 4 5 Gri evous Injuries (2S,OO0 x3) Simple Injuries (5,OOO x 2) Attendant & Extra nourishment Medical expenses and hospital charges Pai n ald Mental Agony Tr ansportation Charges Compensation entitled by the claimant Rs.75,0o0/- Rs. 1O,o00/- Rs.3,00o/- Rs.5,00o/- 2,soo/- 2,OoO/ - 97,soo /- 19. In the result, the Appeal is partly ailowed by enhancing the compensation from Rs.45,O00/_ to Rs.97,5OO/_ which shall Total -4ff4#.t?!er ':.* ." a'' -? - 9 carry interest at 7.5o/o per annum from the date of hling of the petition till the date of realization payable by the respondents jointly and se\rerally. The respondents are directed to deposit the compensalion amount within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment' On such deposit' the petitioner/ appellant is entitled to withdraw the same without depositing any security' There shall be no order as to Miscellaneous Petltlons, if any, Pending shall stand closed. /ffRUE COPY'/ sd/. T. JAYASREE PUTY REGISTRA R SECTION OFFICER \ \ To, lXS,::RlilXi;H"o.:i t:38:llF'sff iJ*i:3[i',TJ]lidditionar , 2. One CC to Sri Y S Yella Nand Gupta' Advocate IOPUCI 3. One CC to Sri N J Sunil Kumar' Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD CoPies District ASAiI/ V I I I t I -l HIGH COURT DATED: 0410312025 JUDGMENT+DECREE MACMA.No.3401 of 2009 {?tr .J O O \ ir stP M ^. (;) .L * * It PARTY ALLOWED. WITHOUT COSTS \ L I i i I I I I I I i t I i t I I I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA TUESDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE , PRESENT [ 3253 J THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI MOTOR ACCI DEN T CIVIL MISCELLANEO US APPEAL NO: 340 tl OF 2009 Between: 2 M- NARAYANA, S/o. Ramulu Municipal Water Works Labour Bodhan R/o. Wadder Cotony, Bodhan Mandal, Oi.irl"t fViirinrOij. '' AND J 4 ...APPELLANT/PETITION ER

9.F!U, S/o. Vittal, Owner of Auto Trolly No. ApgV 1869, R/o. H.No. 2_6_ 225, Pangalli, Bodhan, District Nizamab;'d. National lnsurance Comoany Limited, re_p. by its Branch Manager, Branch Office, Anupam Complei, Bisavesw_ar Cnowt, Bidar, Karnataka State. (vide poricv cover'Note rrro:bsei5;iiirir#' )!-5:2tos id rs-;-id64) -C.C.ioad, '- ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Appeal fired under order section 123 of Motor Vehicres Act against the Judgment and Decree date_d 27-7-2009 passeJ in rv.v.o.p.r,ro.140/200s on the file of the Motor Accident craims Tribunar rvrr AJoi. District Judgej, r.rlrr"o"o at Bodhan. .This appeal cominq on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal the Judgment and Decree of the L-ower court and tne riateriai pup"o in the case and upon hearing the arguments of sri y.s. yeranand erpti, hoiro""t" for the Apperrant and of sii. N.J. dunit Kumar, Aovo-cate for the Respondents. This court doth Judgmeht and Decree as follows: l That the Motor Accident civir Misceraneous Appear be and hereby is Partly ailowed by enhancing the compensation irom ns. +s,oool_ io h". 97'500/- which sha, carry interest @7.so/o p.a from t" orte oinring orihe petition tirr the date of rearization piyabre by the respondent" J"i.irv'""a Severally. .7 To,

2. That the respondents are be and hereby directed to deposit the -compensationamountwithinaperiodoftwomonthsfromthedateof receipt of coPY of this Judgment. g. fh;t'on such deposit the petitioners/appellant be and hereby is entitled to withdraw the same without depositing any Security'

4. That the aforesaid, the decree of the Lower court shall stands confirmed in all other resPects; and

5. That there be no order as to costs in this appeal' //TRUE COPY// Sd/- T. JAYASREE PUTY REGIST SECTION OFFICER 1 The chairman, Motor Accident claims Tribunal-cum-Vll Additional District .tuJge, Nizamdbad at Bodhan (lf any Lower court record) 2 Two CD Copies W HIGH COURT DATED: 0410312025 DECREE MACMA.No.3401 of 2009 PARTY ALLOWED. WITHOUT COSTS 1 6