The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Appellant: SRI PALLATI CHANDRAMOULI Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : - Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SRI N.J. SUNIL KUMAR The Court made the following: JUDGMENT THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUI A YARA M.A.C.M.A.No.595 of 2023 JUDGMENT: Heard Sri P. Chandra Mouli, learned counsel for he appellant and Sri N.J. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for respondeht li r.2. perused the entire record. 2 This appeal is preferred aggrieved by the au,er I passed by the leamed Chairman, Motor Accidept Claims Tribunal-cuI -XIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Courr, Hyderabad, in M.V.O I.No.55 of 2015, dated 3l .03.2023, wherein an amount of Rs. 1,32,139/- vith interest was awarded as compensation in a claim petition filed by thr appellant herein seeking compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- on account of injt ries sustained by him in a road traffirc accident.

3. 'fhe appellant met with an accident on 06.09.20 L . at about 19:30 hours, when he was proceeding in an auto bearing No.Ap .3 TA 1934 from Sangareddy towards Mudimanikyam village. At that tim3 one auto trolley bearing No. AP 23 U 8569 proceeding in opposite dirt,r tion in rash and negligent manner in high speed lost control and dashed t re auto in which the appe[lant was travel]ing. In the said process, the appel mt and the other inmates of the auto f-elt down on the road and sustainec ..racture injuries. RY,J MACMA 595 2023 The appellant sustained fracture injuries to right hand and other grievous injuries to other parts of the body. The appellant was shifted to Shree Balaji Multi Speciality Hospital, Sangareddy, for treatment where he was admitted as inpatient on 11.09.2014 and was discharged on 19.09.2014. On account of medical expenses incurred and the hardships suffered, the appellant filed claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- from the respondents jointly and severally, who were owner and insurer of auto trolley bearing No. AP 23 U 8569.

4. The appellant got examined P.Ws. I to 4 and got marked Exs.A-l to A-10. Respondent No.2 got marked Ex.B-l i.e., copy of insurance policy. Upon examining the evidence adduced on record, the Tribunal awarded compensation which according to the appellant is meagre, as such the present appeal is preferred seeking enhancement.

5. In the grounds of appeal, the appellant contented that the Tribunal failed to consider the oral evidence of P.Ws.l to 4 and exhibits marked under Ex.A- 1 to A- 10 and thereby, awarded meagre compensation. Further, the appellant sustained pemanent disability at 40Yo, but the same was not considered by the Tribunal. As per Ex.A-S disability certificate, disabiliry is shown to be functional and the Tribunal ought to have taken at least 50% towards the same. Further, the Tribunal has awarded meagre 2 RY,J \4ACMA 595 2023 compensation of Rs.27,139/- towards medical exp3 lses, Rs.50,000/- towards future medical expenditure, Rs.30,000/- tou,a.ds transporlation charges and extra nourishment and Rs. I 5,000/- towarc , Ioss of eamings Lastly, it is pleaded that the Tribunal failed to award corr rensation towards mental agony, damage of marriage prospects, loss of :.r renities, pain and sufferance of family members and loss of life expectan: r. On the basis of the afbrementioned leasons enhancement of compensatior is sought

6. I-earrred counsel for the appellant referred to the.j rdgment of Delhi High Court in the case of Anitha Gupta v. Kamleshr. ,,herein an amount of Rs. I ,00,000/- was awarded towards depression and rr ental state due to injuries. Learned counsel for the appellant also relied up( n rhe judgment of this Clourt in Syed Saleem v. Abdul Shukur2, where r it is held that a disabitity certificate issued by a competent medical pracli ioner is sufficient even though the treated doctor is not examined to prov(: :he percentage of disability. Further, it is held that the time gap betwe: r the date of the injury and the date on which disability certificate is ssued cannot be viewed in isolation as the disability cannot be assessed il mediately on the next day of the accident, but only after the injuries are her ed. ' zots ec: zo l qo StNt r l.ro ztz 3 RY.J MACMA 595 2023

7. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.27,139/- towards medical treatment and medical charges, Rs.50,000/- towards future medical expenses, Rs.30,000/- towards attendant charges, extra nourishment and transportation, Rs. I 5,000/- loss of earnings and Rs. l 0,000/- towards pain and suffering and thereby, the total compensation of Rs.1,32,139/- is awarded. A scrutiny of the compensation awarded shows that there is no need to interfere with the compensation awarded towards medical treatment, future medical expenses, attendant charges, extra nourishment, transportation charges and loss of eamings. Flowever, the compensation awarded towards pain and suffering awarded by the Tribunal is less and no compensation is awarded towards permanent disability.

8. As per the evidence of P.W.3-Dr. P.Vikas, the appellant sustained lracture of both bones to forearm ol right hand. The said injury is considered as one fracture injury, therefore, the appellant is entitled for Rs.25,0004 towards pain and suffering of one grievous injury. There is simple injury to head and laceration over right parietal region for this an amount of Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards pain and suffering. Hence, the amount ofRs.10,000/- already awarded by the Tribunal under the head pain and guffering is enhanced to Rs.35,000/- .." \ 4 ffi *. -z RY,J 4ACMA 595 2023

9. The Tribunal has considered the income of he appellant at Rs.5,000/- as thcre was r1o evidence in proof of clr in of income of Rs.7,700/- pe,ronth as office assistant working in l,l/s San.fr India [,imited. The lribunal considered the evidence of ])1/.2 i.c., Dr. Ch. Sulapani and Ex.A-8 disability certificate wherein tl.: pcrccr.rtage of disability is lixed ^t 40o/o, which is partial and pennancr i in r.rature. It is hetd that accordi,g to the appellant, he is working as r ffice assistant in dispatch section a.d his disability will not cause any r bstruction to his rvork as the surgery was successful and his condition ,,as stable. This (lotrrt sees no reason to interfere with the said findirrg, a:; ;uch not inclined to award cornpensation under the head permanent disabi I it ,.

10. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A. is partly allowetl. Ire cornpensation awarded by the -I'ribunal is hereby enhanced ficr r 1,32,1391- to Rs.l'57'139/- with interest at 9%o per annum on the enhar t ed compensation fiom the date ol petition till the date of realization. The enhanced cornpensation amount shall be deposited by the resporr, ients jointly and severally within a period of two months from the date o:' .eoeipt of a copy of this Judgment. on such deposit, the appellant is entitli:, to rvithdraw the entire amount, without fumishing any security. The appr I ant shall deposit 5 I i RY.J MACMA 595 2023 detlcit court fee, if any. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this appeal, shall stand closed' SD/- MOHD.ISMAIL DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// c N OFFICER To, 1 The chairman, Motor Accident craims Tribunal-cum-XrV Additional chief - Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. ! one cc to sRt, PALLATI CHANDRAMOULT, Advocate topucl 3. One CC to SRl. N.S SUNTL KUMAR, Advocate tOpUCi 4. Two CD Copies GE/PSL W 6 HIGH COURT DATED:'t 8/08/2025 JUDGMENT MACMA.No.595 ot 2023 C - .-.:::::_=._ ;"ri :;:;iii:f ". '.,a;-\. \., , r., r 5 oit, 2[?5 ali] i:., ':_^-.-.-' .1.t ,.10,.r- (-' ':t% PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS b f II rO 1}\ IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD 134421 MONDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 595 OF 2023 Between: Goundla Anil Goud, S/o Eshwar Goud, Aged about 20 years, Occ. Presently nil (Previously working as Office boy in Sanofi lndia Ltd) N/o Muppur Village, Pulkal Mandal, Medak District Presently residing al 16-1 1 -1 26412 Moosarambagh, Hyderabad. .. PETITIONER/APPELLANT AND '1 . Dasari Balaiah, S/o Pochaiah Aged Major, Occ. Owner of Auto bearing No. AP 23 U 8569 R/o H.No. 4-4,Faizabad Village, Kowdipally Mandal, Medak District.

2. United lndia lnsurance Co. Ltd, Rep. by its Divisional Manager, T.P. Claims Hub, Church Building Tilak Road, Abids Hyderabad-500001 ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, against the order and decree dated 31-03-2023 in MVOP NO. 55 of 2015 on the file of the court of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Xlv Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. 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 SRI P. CHANDRA MOULI, Advocate for the Appellant and none appeared for the Respondent No.1, and SRI N.S. SUNIL KUMAR, appeared forthe Respondent No.2. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

1. That the Motor Accident Civil tt/iscellaneous Appeal be and is hereby partly allowed. r.- -€i

2. That the compensation ,y?19"q be.and-.is hereby ent.ri nced from 1,32,13gt_ to Rs.1,57,139/- with interest at 9% per--Jnnurr on the enhanced. compensation from the date of petition till thJ JatJof re : lization. 3. That the enhanced compensation amount shall irr deposited by the respondents ,ointly and severally within a purloj"i ,*. nonths from the date ot receipt of a copy of this Judgmen 4. That on such deposit by.the_respondents, the appet,: )t be and is hereby entitled to withdraw the entire amount. witnout furnisnrn,t any security 5. That the appellant shalt deposit deficit Court fee, if any 6. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal /tf rue Copylt To ) ) D/- MOHD.ISMAIL UTY REGISTRAR D ,J TION OFFICER '1. The Chairman. Motor Accjdent.Claims Tribunal_cum.XlV l.r ditiensl ehigl ^ .Judge. City Civir Court. Hyderabad, 2. Two CD Copies GE/PSL M,, :,. HIGH COURT DATED:18/08/2025 DECREE MACMA.No.595 ot 2023 PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS t\ f \ \0