Bala Showri v. 1. Sri P.Kiran

Judgment

1 . This memorandum of Civil Miscellaneous . .1tpeal is filed under Seclion 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1 98 ! (for short .MV Act') assailing the award passed by the Motor ..\ .r:ident Claims Tribunal (lll Additional District Judge), (Fast 1'rack Court), Nizamabad (for short 'the Tribunal), in O.P.No. 14!( of 2004 dated

28.01.2008.

2. Appellant is the petitioner and respor ( ents are the respondents before the Tribunal.

3. Appellant - petitioner has fited petition ,nder Sections 166(1)(a) and 163(A) of MV Acr read wirh Rutt: 55 of A.p.M.V Rules, claiming compensation of Rs.2,OO,OOO/ i)r rhe injuries sustained by him in the motor accident ',vith mr I rrcycle bearing No. AP-25-G-1236. Appellant has conhned the O.r under Section 166(1)(a) of MV Act by filing a memo.

4.1 On 16.12.2OO2 the appellant - petitioner u,;L proceeding on his scooter bearing No.AP-25-E-5294 from Krr napally village towards Nizamabad on his left side of the road, .r ren he crossed Shak[arnagar cross road at Bodha:n, the other mt orcvcle bearing -/ '2/e

BRMR. J MACMA.No.3850 of 2008 No.AP-25-G-1236 came in a negligent manner at high speed in opposite direction and dashed his motorcycle. Due to which he sus[ained grievous inj uries such as lractures, he was immediately taken to Government Hospital, Bodhan where he was given first aid, thereafter he was shifted to Government Headquarters Hospital, Nizamabad and took treatment as inpatient and thereafter at Tirumala Hospital, Nizamabad, underwent operations and fixtures were implanted and he spent Rs. 1,50,000/- for his treatmen t and medicines.

4.2 Prior to the accident appellant-petitioner was hale and healthy, was aged about 40 years, was earning Rs. 15,00O/- per month by doing agriculture and milk business and contributing the same for the welfare of his family. Due to the accident he could not attend the work, thereby he lost his income and prayed to award compensation of Rs.2,00,000/ -.

5.1 Respondent No.1 remained ex parte before the Tribunal.

5.2 Respondent No.2 frled counter and contended that the driver of the crime vehicle do not possess valid driving license as on the date of accident, the amount claimed is excessive and prayed to dismiss the same.

6. The learned Tribunal has framed the following issues: ./ BRMR, J i\.{A I Ir\.No 3850 oJ 2008

1. Whether the accident occurred on 16-12-200'1, ( re to rash and negligent driving of motor cycle bearing No.AI). i li 1236 driven by its driver as per S. 166 of MV Act?

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensat. r? [f so to \\'hat amount and from whom?

3. To what relieP T . Appellant - petitioner is examined as PU' got marked Exs.Al to 44. Respondent No.2 did not adduce an,/ (:vidence but got marked Ex.B I -PolicY.

8. The learned Tribunal after analyzing the c ,, c cnce of the appellant-petitioner coupled with the documents nr |ked thereon with that of Ex.Bl, awarded a sum of Rs.6, z )rJ/- tou'ards compensation payable by the respondents Nos.1 ant 2 jointly and severally with costs and interest at the rate of 7 ..j I per an num from the date of petition till the date of deposit. g. Learned counsei for the appellant - petition( r submits that the learned Tribunal ought to have considered the s'ievousness of the multiple injuries suffered by the appellant-petir,r rer and ought to have granted the whole amount incurred for his reatment. The Tribunal has erred in taking Rs.60/- per day as : r:nings of the appellant - petitioner. The Tribunal ought to h: ,,e considered granting of compensation for future treatment a .l I the interest ought to have been 78Yo per annum instead of '7 I o,'o per ar)num and prayed to allou'the appeal. .?/' \(-l 4 /a BRMR, J MACMA.No 3850 of 200a

10. Notice issued to respondent No.1 in the appeal is served on 22 .12.2OO8 and non-appeared for him. 1 1. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the learned Tribunal has properly appreciated the contentions raised by the parties, rightly awarded the compensation, no interference is called for and prayed to dismiss the appeal.

12. Heard learned counsel on record and perused the material.

13. Now the points for consideration are: (i) Whether the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is just and proper? (ii) Whether the award passed by the learned Tribunal in OP.No. i49O of 2OO4 dated 28.01.2008 suffers from any perversify or illegality. If so, does it require interference of this Court? POINT NOs.l AND 2:

14. Appellant - petitioner has questioned rhe quantum in the present appeal. There is no dispute u'ith regard to the manner in which the accident has taken place.

15. It is the case of the appe.llant - petitioner that immediately after the accident he was taken to Government Hospital, Bodhan wherJ'ho was given hrst aid and thereafter referred to government T}RMR,.I L' I \,1A No 3850 ot 200tt Headquarters Hospital, Nizamabad where he \.,rt; treated as inpatient and referred to Hyderabad for better tr( i tment, but he took treatment at Thirumala Hospital, Nizamabac, r,r.here hc, r.l,as treated as inpatient and underwent major operatior : :o right hand, left leg and steel rods were inserted. After discr rrge from the hospital, he is continuing his follow up treatmenr r rrder a private Orthopaedic Surgeons and that he has incurred r c re than a sum of Rs.1,50,000/-. No medical records are hled r( ,hou. thar the appellant - petitioner has incurred an amount of Rr; 1,50,O00 / _. So also he has not filed any document to show thr t he has taken treatment in Nizamabad Hospital and continued to t Ll<e the same.

16. It is stated in the petition that the appeJlr r,_petitioner is doing agriculture and milk business and earning ! s.12,000/_ per month. Whereas in his cross examination he statt,, that he is an ex-serviceman and at the time of accident he .l ts n.orking as security guard in the Bank of Maharashtra, Nizarn: rad. He denied thc suggestion that as per Ex.A3, he received three s rnple injr_rries.

17. The learned Tribunal has taken into consicr ration Ex.A3 _ wound certificate and found that there are three .;.mple injuries and awarded an amount of Rs.2,OOO/- for eact r.ejury. As the appellant - petitioner did not file any record to sho.,i.his income the learned Tribunal has treated him as a daily u,age I .r.ner, frxt:d the 6/a BRMR, J MACMA.No.3850 of 2008 income at Rs.60/- per day, arrived that the appellant - petitioner could not work for a period of one week and awarded an amount of Rs.400/ - under the head loss of income. The Tribunal also awarded Rs.3O0/- towards medicines and allowed the O.P. Iiled by the appeliant - petitioner in part by awarding an amount of Rs.6,7O0/ - as compensation.

18. Ex.A3 - wound certihcate shows that there are three simple injuries and the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.2,0OO/- for each injury and arrived at Rs.6,000/ - which is proper. Insofar as the income of the appellant - petitioner is concerned, though the appellant stated that he is doing agriculture and milk business and earning Rs. 12,0OO/- per month, but in his cross-examination he stated that he was working as a security guard by the date of accident in Bank of Maharashtra, Nizamabad. As the accident has occurred on 16.72.2002 this Court fixes Lhe income of the appellant-petitioner as Rs.200/- per day. As he nas unable to work for a week days, the loss of income arrived is Rs. 1 ,400/ -. The learned Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards pain and suffering, hence an amount of Rs.50,000/- is awarded to the appellant-petitioner towards pain and suffering. The learned Tribunal has also not awarded any amount towards transportaLion to hospital and extra nourishment. This Court feels that if an ambu:r,t of Rs.5,000/- is fixed under the above said heads will meet -/ -r- ; t e It BRMR.I !,14C[,lA No.:]850 of 2068 the ends of .justice. The appelant - petitioner is ,:ntitred for total compensation of Rs.62,400/_ and the caiculatior s; as under Sl. No Name of the Head Th ree simple injuries l Loss of incom e for a period of one week Pai n and suffering Corng ensation awzrrr r:d b this Court Rs.6, )()0/- Rs.2, I () - for each rn u Rs. 1,, t)0/- Rs.20( ,, J)er da) Rs.5:0O0/- I 2 3 4 Transportation to medical expenses nourishme nt Total hospital, and extra Rs.S r ilOT-- Rs.52.tOO/-

19. The learned Tribunal has awarded inter,_.,t ar the rate of 7.5o/o per annum, which has to be enhanc ed t , gyo as per the decision in the case of Anjali and Others vs. Loke _rdra Rathod and othersl.

20. In the resulr, MACMA.No.3SSO of 2OOg is al rwed in part and the compensadon awarded by the Tribunal is enl i rrced as under: a) The impugned award dated 2g.O1.2OOt] passed in O.P.No. 1490 of 20O4, stands modified. b) The compensation au'arded by tJle T) i rrrnal i.e., Rs.6,70O/- is enhanced to Rs.62,4OO/- tr 1 ether u,ith 2022 SCC Onlrne SC 1683 \- BRMR. J MACMA.No.3850 of 2008 rnterest at the rate of 9o/o pet annum from the date of Iiling the petirion till payment. c) The respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed to deposit the awarded amount with interest and costs jointly and severally less the amount already paid if any within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. d) Appellant - petitioner is permitted to withdraw his entire amount with costs and interest thereon without furnishing security. As a sequel miscellaneous application/s pending if any shalt stand closed. No costs. SD/. A SREENIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I //TRUE COPY// s CTION OFFICER To,

1. The chairman, Motor Accldent craims Tribunar cum II Additionar District Judge, Fast Track Court, Nizamabad.(with records if any) 2. One CC to Mr Lakkadi Dayaker Reddy, Advocate tOpUCl 3. One CC to Mr V Durga, Advocate [OpUC] 4 Two CD Copies Sa/PSL Pvc,, HIGH COURT DATED:02/1212025 o l^ia A a, ic) t 6 l\t\$ ?i]?f ,:r Il :./,\ * DFsr--"- JUDGMENT MACMA.No.3580 of 2008 PARTY ALLOWING MACMA WITHOUT COST{ o (6\>u4 [3448 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO MOTO R ACCIDENT CIVIL MI SCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 3580 OF 2008 Between: Bala Showri, S/o.Luddaiah, aged 40 years, Occ: Agriculture, Milk Business etc., R/o.Ambedkar Colony, Nizamabad. ..APPELLANT AND

1. Sri P.Kiran, S/o.Sri P.Gandhi, Aged: Ma1or, Owner of Suzuki Samurai Motor Cycle bearing No.AP-25. G- 1236, R/o. Gunj Road, Bodhan [V & M], Nizamabad District.

2. The Oriental lnsurance Company Ltd, represented by it's Branch Manager, Branch Office, Pratap Reddy Complex, Beside Hotel Mayur, P.8.No.314, Godown Road, Nizamabad. ...RESPONDENTS Appeal filed under Section 173 of M.V.Act, against Order and Decree dated 28-01-2008 passed in OP.No. 1490 of 2004 on the file of the court of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum lll Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Nizamabad. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and the material papers in the case and upon hearing the argument of Mr Lakkadi Dayaker Reddy, Advocate for the Appellant and Mr V Durga, Advocate for Respondent No.2 This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

1. That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and is hereby allowed in part, 2 That the impugned award dated 2B.O1.2OOB, passe( in O.p. No.l4go of 2004, be and hereby is modified;

3. That the compensation awarded by the Tribunal ie. Rs.6,7O0/- be and hereby is enhanced to Rs.62,4001 together with interest at the rate of g% per annum from the date of filing the petition till paymentl

4. That the respondent Nos.1 and 2 be and hereby are (it €,cted to deposit the awarded amount wjth rnterest and costs joinfly and seve ally less the amount already paid if any within a period of 60 days from the (Jate of receipt of a copy of this judgment;

5. That the Appe,ant - petitioner be and hereby is perlr ti.ed to withdraw his entire amount with costs and interest thereon without fur i;hing security; and 6 That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal SD/- A S,I IEENIVASA REDDY ASSI,;TANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// 5 ECTION OFFICER 7 To, 1 The Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum I Addrtional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Nizamabad Two CD Copres 2 Sa/PSI - Pnc.,. HIGH COURT DATED:02/1212025 DECREE MACMA.No.3580 of 2008 PARTY ALLOWING MACMA W]THOUT CC) ;TS t6lr)-{ )-G