The High Court · 2025

Sri Bikkina Srinivas, S/o. Gopala Krishna, Age not known , Nasarga House. D.No.85/C, First Cross, Nagar, agar, Bellary District, Karnataka State. (Owner of lorry bearing No.KA-34-A-7051) The National lnsurance Company Limited, Represented by its Branch Manger, Sadguru Complex, H.No.2-3-184, '184lA, ll Floor, Kaman to Bus Stand Road, Karimnagar Branch. (lnsurance Policy No. 56040 1 /3 1 /1 6/630000'l 665 valid upto 07 -1 0-20 17 ) Gyara Kistaiah, S/o. Settaiah, Aged 49 years, Occ. Driver of RTC Bus Bearing No. AP-28-Z-3372, Rlo. Dharmaiam Village of Jagadevpur Mandal of Siddipet District ...RespondenuRespondents Counsel for the Appellants: SRI CHANDRA SEKHAR N (sc FoR TSRTC ZONE 2) Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: None Appeared Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI P.BHANU PRAKASH Counsel for the Respondent No.S: Not Necessary The Court made the following: JUDGMENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPAII iI RAO M.A.C.M.A.NO.3L6 0F 2022 JUDGMENT Hcard Sri \ Chaenclr'ii Shckl'rar, learned Stlrr clinq Counsel for appellant TSRTC ancl Sri C.H.Venkatanarayal , representing Sri p.Bhanu pr.irkash, lcarned counscl for the R,:; ;,rndent No.4 lnsurance Company.

2. Thrs appcai has be cn prek)rred by the 'f : tLngana State Roacl TransporL Corporation (he rcir-rafter "TSRI't I for brevit]') questioning tht' ari ard iLnd decrce . datcd 28.lC.) )21 passed in M.V.O,P.No.494 ol 2017 on the file of the (llr Lrrrnan, Motor Accidents Clainrs TribLinal r:um 'l .t Additional I ristr-ict Judge , Karimnagar (he r-e ir-rafter ''Tribr-rnal" for brcvity)

3. For the sakc of convenience, the parties rereinafter arc referred ats thr:r u ere arrat ed bclorc the Tribunzrl

1. Thc briel lacts leading to filing of the appear :re as under:

1.1. The pe titioncr/ inj ured filcd the above lv .V.O.P., under Section I66(1)(a) of the MoLor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation ol Rs.6,00,000/- (Rupees six laklL only) from the respondents for the injuries sustained by her tr a motor vehicle accident. It is statcd that on 05.03.20l7 in evcrt r g the petitioner 2 along with her husband, daughter and drivel nras returning from Hyderabad to Karimnagar in her car bearitrg no'AP-09-BH 1248 and aboul B.0O pm and when the-v reached near OIC Petrol Bunl< in thc oLltskirts of Gouraram, the respondent rlos l ar-rd 4' drive rs of lorrv bearing no.KA-34-A-7051 and RTC bus bearing No.AP-28 Z 3372, respectively, stopped their vehicles in the middle ol the road u'ithout laking anlr prccautions or apph'ing dangerlightsignalindicatorsAsaresultofn'hich,Lhcdriverof thecarofthepetitionerdashedbehindthestationedlorn'"The husbar-rd of the pcritioner and dri"'er of the car died in that accident ancl pc titiot-rer sustai ned inj uries' 4 .2. Tt'Le Police, Couraram P. S , registered a case in Crime No.2B/2017 undr:r Scctions 304-A and 337 of IPC against the drivers of lorn' and I?TC Bus 4 .3. It was further stated that the petitioner u'as halc and healthy and tvas the age of 52 years, working as Junior Assistant rn trrigation Department and u'as earning Rs'29'500/ - p m' Due to the accident, petitioner sustained injuries and was immediately shifted to Government Civil Hospital' Gajwel and later shifted to Global Max Multi Specialty Hospital where she was treated as in-patient from 06'O3'2017 to 15'03'2017' The petitioner was discharged with an advice to have follo"v-up 3 treatment and bed rest for six months. She incurr': I atr amount of Rs.2,00,000/- towards her treatment, transl) rrtation and extra- nouris hmc nt.

5. Before thc Tribunal, rcspondent Nos.l anr 2 lr'ert' set ex parte and respondent Nos.3 to 5 filed countcr opposinii the relief o[ compensation amount oi Rs.6,00,000 i Respondent No.5 (TSRTC) in his counter submitted that the re s pondent No.4 (drivcr of the busJ ,,r'as ciriving the bus by taking r I precautions and there \\:as rIO negligcnce on ll-re part of rcr,r ondent No.4. Therefore, the peLition rs liablc- to be disnr ssed against respondent No.5, It rvzrs furLher contentcd that t te Police liled thc case against respondenl Nos.1 and I lor claiming compensation.

6. After cor-rsrdering the oral and document e l \' evidcnce on record, the Tribunal came to the conclusion ttr: stopping the vehicies on the midclle of the road without i ny signals or indicators shou,s negligence on the part of the lrivers of lorry and bus. [t cannot be cxpected lrom the driver tl the car, if had taken all the precautions no accident woulcl rave ocr:urred. Thus, awarded an amount of Rs.30,000/- to.r ards parn and suffering; Rs. I 5,0OO/ - to\^rards transportat ( n and extra nourishment and rhe amount of Rs. I ,21 ,l7Sl- i r medi*r1 biils, r,, 4 which total comes to Rs. 1 ,66, 175/ . Further held that respondent Nos. 1 to 5 are joir.rtl1, and severally liable to pav rhe - compensation. Tl're 3.,1 respondent being tl-re insurer of crime vehicle-lorn' and q,t, respondent bcing the or,l'ner of RTC bus were held as jornt tort feasors and direr:tcd to deposit the amount to the extent of thetr sharc with interesl Qi, 7.5tYo per annum. 7 . Aggrie vcd bi' the said order, the appcllant TSRTC filed the present Appeal B. 'lhe learncd counsel ior appellant/TsRTc submitted that tl-rc 'lribunal iarled to see that thcre n'as no negligence on the part of the TSR1'C bus driver and the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of thc car r.r,hich hit the stationed lorn. Further, submitted that the TribunzLl failcd to see the contributory negligcnce and errcd in rel1,ing upon the oral testimony of PW- I s,hile ignoring the evidence of RW. 1 and concluding that the accident occurred due to the act of the 5th respondent/TSRTC. Moreover, Tribunal erroneously assessed the age of injured by only relying on Ex.A2 i.e., the charge sheet. Further, the Tribunal erred in awardir-rg compensation of Rs.30,OO0/- tou,ards 'pain and suffering' and Rs.1,21,1751" towards'Medical Bills'. 5 g, The learned cortnsel for TSRTC argued that :he Tribunal ought not to har,'c awardecl the exorbilant aI t runts under dilfercnt heads and finallv, prayed to set aside the .rvard pa ssed lrv thr: Tribu nal .

10. Learned coLtnsel for respondent No.'1 herein '' 'l'rtendcd that the clriver of car drove his car rvith high spee'l in rash and negligent manrler and dashed against the statict ed lorry' The accident occurrcd onll' due to the negligence ol lre car driver' Thercfore, the driver and orvner of lorr-r' and :;rt )sequel-Itly its lnsurance Companr is not lierble to pa,\' all-\' coml) ' lsation. I l. In the lighL of lhc abovc, thc contention ( I the appe'llant thaI unreasonable and excessive compensatio: amount was granted under different heads is trntenable, as tl- r Tribunal after considering the evicicrtce aq ardccl the compcl'ls,rt ( n in d pl'oper perspecti\re. F urther, the conterltion raised ll, the appellant disputing the age o[ the petitioner is not relevatr, i:-r this case, as compensaLion a$'arded uas under the heads :' medical brlls, pain and suffering and [ransportation and er, zt nourishment only. Thus, in the considered view of this Court, this Court does not lind any reason to interfere with the u'ell t r rrsidered award passed by the Tribunal. 6 ,

12. In vierv of the above, this Court is ol the considered vier.r, that appellant-TSRTC failcd to make out any case u,arranting interlerence b-r' this Court u itlr thc irr-rpugncd Ar.r,ard. The Appeal fails erncl is accoldingh rlrsruiss<.cl. confirming thc in-rpr_rgr-red Ordcr and Decrec datcd 28.1O.2O21 passed by the Tribunal. Thcrc shall bc no orcicr as to ('osts. Miscellancous petitiorrs. il an,r,, pendrng shall stand closcd SD/. M. OSMAN ALI BAI SSISTANT RE AR /iTRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1 The Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-l Additional District Judge, Karimnagar. 2 One CC to SRI CHANDRA SEKHAR N (SC FOR TSRTC ZONE 2) Advocate IoPUC]

3. One CC to SRI P.BHANU PRAKASH, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies Spare KVR/nvb Yk HIGH COURT DATED:1011012025 JUDGMENT+DECREE MACMA.No.316 of 2022 i:.\ . >\5. '(_., \j, l l tR 2ii20 i1 .) tit . DISMISSING THE MACMA WITHOUT (; ]STS G co ln .et'- $e IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD [ 3485 ] FRIDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO MOTOR ACCIDEN T CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 316 OF 2022 Between: AND 1 2 3 4 Telangana State Road Transport Corporation, Rep. by its Managing Director- cum-Vice President, Bus Bhavan, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. ...AppellanURespondent No.5 Sabbani , Bonthala Shakunthala, Wo. Swamy Das, Aged 52 years. Occ. Junior Assistant in Irrigation Department, R/o. H.No.7-2-915, [/ankammathota locality of Karimnagar town and District ... Respondenupetitioner Sonu Kumar Sharma, S/o. Shivanath Sharma, Aged 23 years, Occ Driver of Lorry bearing No. KA-34-A-7051, R/o. Gangapur village of Manair Panchayat, Chandrapur, Baliya District, Uttar Pradesh State. Sri Bikkina Srinivas, S/o. Gopala Krishna, Age not known, Nasarga House, D.No.B5/C, First Cross, Nagar, agar, Bellary District, Karnataka State. (Owner of lorry bearing No.KA-34-A-7051) The National lnsurance Company Limited, Represented by its Branch Manger, Sadguru Complex, H.No.2-3-184, 184/A, ll Floor Kaman to Bus Stand Road, Karimnagar Branch. (lnsurance Policy No.560401 /3 1 i1 6/630000 1 665 valid upto 07 -1 0-2017 ) 5 Gyara Kistaiah, S/o. Settaiah, Aged 49 years, Occ. Driver of RTC Bus -Bearing N6. AP-28-Z-3372. Rlo. Dharmaram Village of Jagadevpur Mandal of Siddipet District' ...RespondenuRespondents Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the order and decree in M.V O.P.No.494 ol 2017 dated 28.10.2021 on the file of the Court of the Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-l Additional District Judge, Karimnagar. 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 N.Chandra Shekar, Advocate for the Appellant and of Sri P.Bhanu Prakash, Advocate for the respondent No 4 and None Appeared respondent No.1 to 3, and respondent No.5 : not necessary party to this Appeal. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

1. That the lvlotor Accident Civil Mlscellaneous Apperl be and hereby is dismissed.

2. That save as aforesaid. the decree of the Tribunal sh:rl stands confrrmed in all other respects; and

3. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. SD/- I I. OSMAN ALI BAIG AS{; STANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Chairman l\4otor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-l A: iitional District Judge. Karimnagar.

2. Two CD Copies Spa re KVR/nvb Y\- HIGH COURT DATED:1 011012025 DECREE MACMA.No.316 oI 2022 DISMISSING THE MACMA WITHOUT C OSTS ,^'fl"r' V\,- i-tttt