Boya Srinivasulu @ B. Srinivas v. B. Narsi Reddy

Counsel for the Appellant: Sri C. Mohan Prakash Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: None Appeared Counsel for the Respondent No. 2: Sri K. Ajay Kumar The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELA \ JANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR RET DY I.A.No.2 of 20t9 In And M.A.C.M.A.N o. 449 of 2Ot9 DATE: O1 12. 2025 Between: Boya Srinivasrrllr r2r', B. Srinivas R. Narsi Reddl irncl another AND COMMON JUDGMENT Appellanr I s pondents Being not satished wilh thc qLrilnturn of compcnsar r. I awarded in the order trncl rlr.cree dated lg lO 20lg passed in M.V.() J.No 299g of 2014 by the Charrman, Moror A.cidc.t Craims TribuL.r r -,rrtrn-XIII Adclrtional I'r:rck CoLrrt), City Cir.r Court at to as "the Tnbun.rl,,), rl r present Chicl Judge (Fasr (hcr t,ir-rafter rcfcrrcd Hyderabad apPeal has becn flicd by the appcllant claimant, along wit l- 20 I9, seeking cnhrLnccment of tl.rr.comlter.rs;rtion l\.No.2 of

2. The l]rief fac:ts of thc casr: are th.tr on 17.1O.2O1, .rt about 08.00 A.M., whil(.thc appcllant_claimal L w.is doing C.C Rc r I work at Venkat Redd), Nag;rr Colony, Nagaram Villagc, Ranga Reci i., a loryr \:- ) bearing No.AP-29 W-3429 was negligcntly movcd during unloading, resulting in hrs sustarnin{< the blecding injuries. Irnmediately alter the accident, the .rppellant claimant rvas shtfted to Vijaya I Iospital, Nagaram, for trcatment and hc was drscharged on 20.1O.2O14. Tlrc Police of Kcesar-a also registered a crinrinal case, vide Crime No 347 of 20 14 undcr Section 337 o[ IPC against the driver of the Lorry' Stating that the appellant-claimant, who was aged 32 years old, was hale and healthy by thc time o[ thc accident and he was working as a Mason carning Rs.1O,OOO/ pcr month, filcd the aloresaid claim pclition before the Tribunal. Lrnder Scction 166ofthe Motor Vehicles nct, 1988 read with Rule 455 ol'Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 & Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation of Rs.2,99,000/- otr account of the injuries sustained by him in the said accident, against thc owner and insurcr o[ the lorry.

3. Before thc Tnbunal, resPondcnt No l i.e., owner of the lorry remained ex parle. Respondr:nt No-2-insmance Company hlcd a counter dcnying the avcrments o[ the ciaim petition and contended that the cornpensation claimed rvas excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim-

4. Thc Tribunal, on apprcciation of the oral and documentary evidence, recorded frndrng to thc effect that the said accident occurred due to rash and ncgligent driving of lorry driver and apportioned 3 Iiability on rcspondent Nos.l and 2 and awarded cor | :nsalion ()f Rs.1,25,OO0/- togcthcr interest (.{, 6%o pcr annum to t.r, ap})ellant- claimant on acc-oltnL of the injunes, as against 1r claim oI Rs.2,99,O00/-. Aggrievcd by lhe sarne, the present all .r[ is hlecl, along with I.A.No.2 of 2019, seeking enhancerr - r of thc cornpensation to Rs.l2,OO.0O0/ .

5. Considered the submissions of thc learnecl coLr ;:l for thc parties zrnd pcruscd the record.

6. There is no dispute with regarcl ro the nndirrg ol L r: Tribun:rl that the accident was caused due to the ncgligcnce o[ tl]. l()rn, drrver and Iiabilit5r. 7 . So far as lhc assessmcnt o[ quantum of corr.t l: ,]rsatton is concerned, orr a re appraisal of the record, it is evicl , rr Lhal the appt:llant clairnant, aged 32 ycars at the time oi ac.: r ,tL. lvas f skilled labourcr (mason), earning approximatcl,v Ils ( OOO/- per month. He sustaincd comminured lracturc of right tibr, r rnd tibula, and undcrwe| [ surgical treatlrent, as borne out b-v t r disc:hargc sltmmary (Ex.A-5) and a permancnt disability certificat,r ( .)i.n./) was issued by the trcating doctor (p.W. 3), asscssi.g his disa ).it-v as 60o,ir (functional/stmctural). Thc Tribunar, horvever, rejectecr r i, disabilit-r' certificate onlv on thc grorrnd that it *,as issued "a[ter tr, r r cars,, and that the trealrng doctor (p.W_2) did not corroborrLr : ILrnctronal !- ,| disability. Such approach ol mcchanically rejecting a medical certihcate without assigning cogent and valid reasons runs contrary to Iaw. It is well settled that oncc .r contpcLcnt rrredir.al authority certifies permanent disability, thc certifir.ate is admissible and relevant evidence, and a Court/Tribunal ought not to substitute its own assumptions in the guisc of re-asscssrnent, unlcss there is adequatc basis and reasoning.

8. Having regard to the claiuralrt's occupation its a mason (ntanual, skilled labour) carning approximarclv Rs. 10,000/- per month and the disability certificate (Ex.A 7) issur:d by the treating doctor {P.W.- 3)assessing 6001, perrnanent drsabilrtl', this Court is of thc opinion that an amount of Rs.2,OO,000/- necds lo I:c awarded tou,ards permancnt disability and Rs- 1,00.0OO/ towards loss of future carnrng capacity and all other amoLrnls av,'arded by I hc 'I'ribllnal under dificrent heads, totalrng to Rs.),25,0O0/- can bc maintairred. Thus, thc appellant-clarmant is cnt rtlcd to total compensation of Rs.4,25,000/-.

9. Coming to the rate of int{ rcst. .}s the [[on'blc Supreme Col-trt in National Insurance Cornpang Ltd.. us. Mannat Johal o.nd othersl and in several subsequent der:isior.rs hcld that thc reasonable rate of interest to be arvardcd in motor accLdent claim cascs shall bc 7.5%" per L AIR 2019 SC 2079 5 annum, this Court is of the opinion that thc rate of inlr st awardcd by the Tribunal iu the instant case is on thc lower side i rc thc samc rcqLrires rnodification.

10. In the reslrlt, LA.No.2 of 2019 is allowed ancl r:. ilppeal is partly allowed, by enhancing the compensation au,:r €d l)y thc Tribunal from Rs.1,25,000/ 1o Rs.4,25,000 /_. Ty,.. enhanced compensation shall cerrry interest at T .Sok per annum fro r r hc datt: of pctrtion till the datc of realization. The rest of tht t:rnrs rrnd conditions imposed by the'lribLrnal shall remain unalt: r L No order ils to cos ts. As a sequel, the miscellaneoLrs petitions pendinq, anv. slta ll sland closed Sd/. A. S,I IEENIVASA REDDY SSI iTANTREGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cr-rrr )llll Additional Chief Judge (Fast Track Court), City Civil Court at Hyderabad

2. One CC to Sri C. fi/ohan Prakash, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri K. Ajay Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies AS Pr\c. HIGH COURT CVBR, J DATED: 0111212025 t' // ,' /k\' riSt)!i :) .; r:: q T/y E [irP' 1'l ri ,{) \," 'i\' .r. JUDGMENT+DECREE lA NO: 2 OF 2019 IN/AND MACMA.No.449 of 2019 ALLOWING THE lA NO: 2 OF 2019 IN/AND PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA.No.449 of 2019 WITHOUT COSTS r6\ >\t+' € IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF DECEIVIBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY lA NO: 2 OF 2019 IN/AND MACMA NO: 449 OF 2019 Between: Boya Srinivasulu @ B. Srinivas, S/o. Venkanna ...APPELLANT AND

1. B. Narsi Reddy, S/o. B.Buchi Reddy, 2. Reliance General lnsurance company Limited, Rep. by its Regional Manager, 4-1-327,IV Floor, Sagar Plaza, Abids, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS AppealfiledunderSectionlT3ofMotorVehiclesActagainsttheorder and Decree dated, 19-10-20 18 in M.v.o.P. No.299B of 2014 0n the file of the court of the chairman, Motor Accidents claims Tribunal-cum-Xlll Additional Chief Judge (Fast Track Court), City Civil Court at Hyderabad ' This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the court below and the material papers in the case and upon hearing the arguments of sri c- Mohan Prakash, Advocate for the appellant and sri K. Ajay Kumar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2 and none appeared for Respondent No. 1 either in person or by Advocate' This Court doth Order and Decree as follows: 1 . That the MACMA be and hereby is Allowed; 2. That the compensation awarded by the Tribunal and enhanced from Rs 1,25,0OO1 - to Rs. 4,25,000/-;

3. That the enhanced compensation shall carry interest ( | 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization;

4. That the rest of the terms conditions imposed by the -ribunal shall remain unaltered; and

5. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. SdA A. Ii AS€ I IEENIVASA REDDY iyXrur neersrnnn .,[;--il; //TRUE COPY// To,

1. The Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cunr. (lll Additional Chief Judge (Fast Track Court), City Civil Court at Hyderabad

2. fwo CD Copies AS ?f^-(. HIGH COURT CVBR, J DATED: 0111212025 DECREE lA NO: 2 OF 2019 IN/AND MACMA.No.449 of 2019 ALLOWING THE lA NO: 2 OF 2019 IN/AND PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA.No.449 of 2019 WITHOUT COSTS 8l.^q. \ 6 [)-{>6