Sri. lt/.A. Wajeed v. 1. The Managing Director

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 2: NONE APPEARED Counsel for the Respondent No.3: N S BHASKARA RAO The Court made the following: JUDGMENT THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P,SRBE SUDHA M.A.C.M.A.No.247 4 of 2OO9 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed against lhe Order datr C 14. ll.2OO7 in O.P.No.1694 of 2O05 passed by the v Additional Metropolitar.r Sessions Judge (Mahila Cr r,Lrt)-cum-XIX Additional Chief Judge, City Criminal Courts al Jyderabad

2. The appellant/ petitioner h1ecl O.P.No.1t !t4 of 2OO5, claiming compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- lbr injuries sustained b-r' the petitioner in the road tt' rific accident occurred on 08.06.2OO5.

3. Learned counsel for appellan t/ petitioner ;1ated that on behalf of the petitioner, P.Ws. 1 to 3 were ( xamined and Exs.A1 to A14 were marked. trx.B1 rl,as markc -l on behalf of respondents

4. The Trial Court considering the orai and ,Locumentary evidence granted tts. 1, 16,00O/ rvith interes t @ 7o/o per annum from the date of petition to till the d; te of deposit. Challenging the quantum of compensation :r, meagre, the petitioner has hled the present appeal .. ^ .:rrll:-i 2

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that as per Ex.A1 1, the disability certifrcate, the petitioner sustained partial and permanent disability at 35%, but the trial Court did not considered the disability.. The trial Court not granted any compensation for exti-a nourishments, transportation, attendant charges and dishguration. Therefore, requested this Court to enhance the compensation by modifying the order of the Trial Court.

6. Heard both sides. Perused the record.

7. As per the evidence of P.W.3, doctor, stated that he did not treat the petitioner irnmediately after the accident and petitioner came to the hospital on 15.O9.2005 and on examination, he found that the petitioner sustained fractures of non-union of right tibia shaft grade-lB communited fracture and both bone medial condyle of right tibia. A surgery was performed in the form of interlocking nail fixation on 03.07.2O05.

8. The petitioner uras aged 24 yearc at the time of hling of the O.P. The petitioner was working as car mechanic and earning Rs.4,00O/- per month. On perusal of the record, this court hnds it reasonabie to take his disabitity as 3570 as per J Ex.Al1 ancl the appropriate multiplier is t 3' and the compensation under the head 'disabilitr comes to Rs.3,02,400/ (4O00 x 12 x 18 x 35%) and he ir also entitled to Rs.15,000/- towards pain and suffenng. Rs.15,0OO/ tou,ards loss of amenities, Rs. 10,0OO/ - tr vrards extra nourishment, Rs.10,O0O/- towards liansportation, Rs. 10,OO0/- towards attendant charges, Rs.45,- i'3/ towards meclical expenses and Rs.32,OOO/- (40OO x B) t' r,'arc1s loss of earnings for a period of eight months. g. Therefore, the appellants/ petitioners are e r-rtitled for the compensation in the following terms: { 1 2 4 5 6 7 B Pain and Suffering Loss of Amenities Transportation Extra nourishment Attendan t charges Medial expenses Loss of earnings Disability TOTAL Rs r5,000/- Rs . 15,000/- Rs. t0,0OO/ Rs . 1O,O00/- Rs . lO,O00/- Rs +5,2731- \ R )2,OOOl- ,o2,4oo /- Rs. 1,39,673l- Rs 3

10. In the result, the appeal is allowed by :trhancing the compensation amount from Rs.1,16 ,OOO I - to F1s.4,39,673/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Thirty Nine Thousand Si:. Iundred and Seventy Three only) with interest at the rate of Z .Sok per \ 4 annum from the date of filing the petition till date of realization. Respondent No.3 shall deposit the entire amount within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the petitioner is permitted to withdrau' the total amount along with interest accrued on it. The appellant/ petitioner is directed to pay the deficit court fee on the enhanced amount. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed Sd/. N SRIHARI UTY REGISTRAR E //TRUE COPY// s ON OFFICER To,

1. The Chairman I\,4otor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- V Additional Ivletropolitan & Session Judge (lVlahila Court)-cum XIX Additional Chief Judge, City Criminalcourts at Hyderabad.

2. One CC to SRl. T D PANI KUIUAR Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRl. N S BHASKARA RAO Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies I SS HIGH COURT DATED:0910412025 ORDER rS- () Tfl5 MACMA.No.2474 of 2009 a\- ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT C(I:515 ?r [ 3208 I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA MOTOR ACC IDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO:.2474 OF 2009 Between: Sri. M.A. Wajeed, S/o M.A.Majeed Car Mechanic R/o H.No.17-4-383 Dabeerpura,. Mataki khiddi, ...APPELLANT AND

1. The Managing Director,, APSRTC, Administrative Building, RTC X Roads, Hyderabad.

2. K.Shankara Reddy, S/o Nageshwar Reddy Plot no. 9, Phase V, lDA, Jeedimetla, 3, The Oriental lnsurance Company Limited,, Divisional Office-lV 6-2-976 1st floor, Capital Pavani Estates, ...RESPONDENTS Appeal filed Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the Order and decree in M.V.O.P No.1694 of 2005 dated 14.11-2OO7 on the file of the Court of the Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- V Additional tvletropolitan & Session Judge (Mahila Court)-cum XIX Additional Chief Judge, City CriminalCourts at 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 arguments of SRI T D PANI KUMAR, Advocate for the Appellant and ofSRl N S BHASKARA RAO, Advocate for the Respondent No.3 and none appeared for Respondent No.1 & 2. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows: 1 . That the MACMA be and hereby is allowed. 2. Thal the compensation amount awarded by the tribunal be and hereby enhanced from Rs.1,16,000/- to Rs.4,39,6731 (Four Lakhs Thirty Nine Thousand Six Hundred and Seventy Three Only) with interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of filing the petition till the date of realization.

3. That the Respondent No.3 shall deposit the entire an ount within a period of one month from the date of order.

4. That on such deposit, the appellanUpetitioner is be a rrj hereby permitted to withdrawn the total amount along with interest accrued or it.

5. That the appellanUpetitioner be and hereby directed c pay the deficit court fee on the enhanced amount.

6. That save as aforesaid, the decree of the Tribunal sl:1 stands confirmed in all other respects; and

7. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. //TRUE COPY// /\ Sd/. N SRIHARI DEPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunz -,;um- V Additional Metropolitan & Session Judge (Mahila Court)-cunr )(lX Additionat Chief Judge, City CriminalCourts at Hyderabad.

2. Two CD Copies SS HIGH COURT DATED:0910412025 DECREE MACMA.No.2474 of 2009 ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS ebLl\w-