Judgment · High Court · 2010

Judgment

This civil miscellaneous appeal is filed by the petitioner- claimant against the judgment and decree of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Asifabad, in O.P.No.353/2003.

#2. Heard.

#3. The brief facts are as follows: On 13.03.2003 at about 5.00 p.m. the petitioner, who was aged 10 years, was coming by walk by the side of the road at Kelapur. At that time one auto bearing No.AP-IU-6101 proceeding from Bheemineni to Ityala came in high speed and dashed against the petitioner, on account of which he received injuries on his toes of both legs. Immediately, he was taken to government hospital, Dahegaon. After discharge from the government hospital, he took treatment at private hospital also. He spent Rs.25,000/- towards medical expenses. He claimed compensation of Rs.1.00 lakh. Insurance company filed counter denying the petition allegations.

#4. On the basis of the pleadings, the following issues were framed:

#1. Whether the petitioner sustained injuries in motor accident dated 13.03.2003 involving vehicle No.AP 1U-6101?

#2. If so, whether the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of vehicle No.AP-1U-6101 by R-1’s driver?

#3. Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from which of respondents? 4. To what relief?

#5. On behalf of the petitioner, P.W.1 was examined and Exs.A1 to A3 were marked. On behalf of the respondents, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced. On the basis of the material on record, the court below granted compensation of Rs.30,000/-. Aggrieved by the above quantum, the present appeal is filed.

#6. Now, the point for consideration is whether there are any grounds to enhance the compensation?

#7. As per Ex.A3 the medical certificate, the petitioner suffered crush injury to both legs, right foot, right great toe, trammatic amputation loss of pulp of right great toe, there was a fracture on the left foot and dorsum of left foot. The learned trial Judge has given a finding that the petitioner lost right great toe, which is a partial permanent disability.

#8. The petitioner was 10 years old boy at the time of accident and he has to bear his disability through out his life loosing several amenities in life apart from the physical disability that might effect his earning capacity as well. Considering these circumstances, the compensation of Rs.1.00 lakh claimed was not unreasonable as the petitioner suffered crush injury and other injuries to both the feet.

#9. Accordingly, the C.M.A. is allowed and the compensation is enhanced from Rs.30,000/- to Rs.1.00 lakh. Interest on the enhanced amount of compensation shall be at 6% per annum. No costs. ______________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J. 3rd December 2010, Rns