The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. S SURENDER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent no.4: SRl. A.V.K.S PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent nos.1 to 3: None appeared The Court made the following: ORDER :] TEIE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY MACMA No.519 of 2OL9 JUDGMENT: Thrs a1;pczil is filcrl by the arppellant-claimant, aggrievecl by the awa:d dated l2.ll.2OLB passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident,; Claims Tribunal-cum-lll Additional District Judge, Asifabad (for short "the'l'ribunal") in O.P.No. 125 of 2OlB, whereby the Trib':nal awarded compensation of Rs.I,79,5OOl- as against the clainr of Rs.3,50,O00/-.

2. Th.e briel feicts of the case are that on 22.05.2017 at about

2.30 p.nr., while tl-re appcllant was proceeding on a motorcycle as a pillion rider along with one Durgam Gnaneshwar from Bellampalli to Akkalapalli Village and when they reached near Karim Bike/ Motor Oycle Repairing Shop at Jankapur Village, a car bearing No.TS-CI1-UA-5768, driven by the 1"t respondent in a rash and negligent marrrler, came at high speecl and dashed the motorcycle and as a. result, the appellant sustained head injury, fractures, and multipl,: injuries all over the body. It is stated that immediately after ttre accident, the appellant rvas treated at the Government Hospite.l, Rellampalli, and Iater shifted to Pulse Critical Care Hospiterl, Mancherial, where he was admitted as an inpatient from

22.O5.iLol7 to 3O.O5.2017. Tl:,e appellant filed the aforesaid O.P. againsl: respondent Nos. I to 4 i.e., the driver and the owner of the 2 r--': crime vehicle and the Insurance Company, claiming compensation of Rs.3,5O,OO0/- for the injuries sustained by him- Before the Tribunal, respondent Nos.l and 2 i.e., the driver

3. and tlrc owner of the crime vehicle remained ex parte aud responclent Nos.3 and 4 i.e., the Insurance Company filed couuter denying the averments of the claim petition and contended that the amount claimed is excessive and prayed to dismiss the claim petition. The Tribunal, on appreciation both oral and documentary evidence, came to the conclusion that the accident occurred due to the rash ancl ncgligent driving of the l*t i:espondent anC that the appellant sustained grievous injuries and awarded compensation of Rs. l,7g,5ool- as against the claim of Rs.3,50,OOO/-. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation arvarded by the Tribunal, the appellant-claimant filed the present appeal.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record

5. It is evident that the finding of the Tribunal with regard to the manner in ,*,hich the accident took place has become final, as the same was not challenged by either of the reqpondents'

6. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned, a perusal of the material on record shows that the medical bills produced as Exs.A-4 to A-8 substantiate that the appellant- (- E IDA \ :.\, I 3 claimant incurred considerable medical expenditure. However, the Tribunal erred in taking the income of the appellant at Rs.4,000/- per month. The accident occurred in the year 2017, and the appellant (aged 19 years) was engagecl in private emplo,yment. Even in the absence ol documentary cviclence, the notional income lor a person ctoing priverte worl< can reasonably be taken al Rs.7,500/- per month. If the same is taken into account, the loss of earnings for six rr.onths works out to Rs.45,00O/- (Rs.7,5OO x 6 months).

7. Hirving regard to the netture of flracture injury, hospitalization and period of treatment, this Court is of the opinion that the compensation under the head of pain and suffering should be enhancr:d to Rs.1,OO,000/- ancl for the attendant charges and transportation, Rs.3O,O0O/- is reasonable. The medical bitls proved for Rs.85,560/- are supported by record and are accordirgly maintained. The compensation payable to the appellant-claimant is tabulatecl as under:- sl. No. I 2 3 4 Name of Head Pa n and suffering Mrdical Bills Trirnsport & Attendant Cbarges Loss of Earnings Awarded by Tribunal Rs. Ps. 60,000.00 85,500.00 1o,o00.00 24,O00.00 Awarded by this Court Rs. Ps l,oo,000.oo 8s,500.oo 30,000.0o (Rs.7,500 x 6 months) 45,000.oo TOTAL 1,79,5O0.OO 2,6(),O0O.OO 4 _=-(-,

8. In the result, this appeal is partly allowed. The compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.1,79,500/- to Rs.2,60,O00/- with interest at 7.S'Yo per annLrm from the date of petition till the date of realization, pa-yable by the respondent Nos.l to 3 jointly and severally, within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of copy of i-his judgment. On such deposit, the appellant-claimant is entitled to withdrar*'the same. As a sequel, the miscellaueotrs petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs. Sd/. M.JAWAHAR REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I 6 //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To J udse, Asifabad Wll1 !g.cg1gl

1. The chairman, Motor Accidents claims Tribunal-cum-lll Additional District 2. ondcc to Sir.5 SuneuoEri nrooy, Advoqqle.[oPuc] 3. on; ca io sni. n-.v.K.s. PRASAD, Advocate [oPUC] 4. Two CD CoPies Kh/pr HIGH COURT CVBR, J DATED i 131111202s \ \ JUDGMENT MACM/\.No.S19 of 2019 {t. 5 11 lqun tutt 6) i> -& * * PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 519 OF 2019 Between: Durgam Chandra Shekar, S/o. Durgam Shankar, Age - 20 years, Occ - Private Job, R/o. Akkalapalli, Bheemini Mandal, Presently residing at Ramnagar, Adilabad. ...APPELLANT/PETITION E R AND

1. Choppadandi Gopi, S/o.Gajjaram, Age - 34 years, Occ: Driver of Car, H.No.5- 4-121, Budhawarpet, Harijanwada, Nirmal

2. Manikanta Traders, Rep. by its Devara Rajya Laxmi, W/o. Ramesh, Age - Major, Occ: Owner of Crime Vehicle Car R/o. H.No. 5-3-162, Budhawarpet, Harijanwada, Nirmal

3. United lndia lnsurance Company Ltd, Rep., by its Branch manager, Branch Office, Nirmal

4. United lndia lnsurance Company Ltd., Rep. by its Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Adilabad ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Appeal filed under Section of Motor Vehicles Act against the Order and Decree made in M.V.O.P.No. 125 of 2018, dated 12.11.2018on the file of the Court of the Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims Tribunal - Cum - lll Additional District Judge, Asifabad. 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 MVOP and upon hearing the arguments of Sri. S.SURENDER Reddy, 'Advocate for the Appellant and of Sri A.V.K.S PRASAD, Advocate for the Respondent no.4 and None appeared for the Respondent nos.1 to 3. I I I i t i i i i i This Court cloth Order and Decree as follows 1 . That the MACMA be and hereby is parfly allowed;

2. That the compensation amount awarded by the tribunal be and hereby enharrced from Rs.1,79,500/- to Rs.2,60,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annurn from the date of petition till the date of realization, payable by on the respondent Nos.1 to 3 jointly and severally, within a period of two (2) months from ':he date of receipt of copy of this Judgment;

3. That on such deposit, that the appellant claimant be and hereby entiled to withdraw the same;

4. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal //TRUE COPY// Sd/. M.JAWAHAR REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR6 SECTTON OFFICER To

1. The lhairman, lvlotor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-lll Additional District Judge, Asifabad. 2. Two CD Copies Kh/pr HIGH COURT cvBR, "l DATEDi 1311112025 DECREE MACMI\.No.S19 of 2019 PARTI.Y ALLOWING THE MACMA \