The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Appellant : Sri M C Acharyulu( Not present) Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : Sri K Ajay Kumar Counsel for the Respondent No.l : - - - The Gourt delivered the following: Judgment THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 22OS of 2OL4 JUDGMENT: This appeal has been filed by the claimant aggrieved by the ordei and decree dated 26.08.2013 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Xl Additional Chief Judge, Fast Track Court, City Civil Court at Hyderabad (for short ,the Tribunal) in M.V.O.P. No.18O4 of 2009, seeking enhancement of compensation. 2 No representation on behalf of the appellant.

3. Heard Sri K.Ajay Kumar, Iearned counsel for respondent No.2-ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited.

4. Brief facts of case: On 20.09.2O08 the appellant was travelling in auto bearing No.AP 28 Y 2763 from Gudimalkapur to Moinabad, on the way near Bhaskar Hospital, suddenly one Tata Mobile auto bearing No. AP 23 TV 0025 being driven by its driver came lrom opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner. Due to which the duto in which the appellant was travelling, turned turtle and the appellant has sustained grievous injuries all over the body. The 2 Police, Moinabad P.S. registered a case in Crime No.205 of 20Og for the offence under Sections 337, 338, 422 of Ipc and Section 181 of the Motor Vehicles Act, ig8g against the driver of Tata mobile auto bearing No. Ap 23 TV 0025. Thus, the appellant has filed M.V.O.P.No.18O4 of 2OO9 against the respondent Nos. 1 and, 2, who are owner and insurer of the Tata mobile auto bearing No. AP 23 TV 0025 claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-.

5. Considering the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal has allowed the O.p. in part and awarded compensation of Rs.50,000/_ to be payable by the respondent No.2 at first and later recover the same from the respondent No. 1 by filing execution. petition without {iling any suit.

6. According to the appellant, he has sustained grievous injuries namely i) deep laceration over papliteal toes ieft, ii) laceration over left bone of wrist, iii) laceration over scurl and iv) fracture of clavicle left in the accident occurred due to rash 4nd negligent driving of the driver of Tata mobile auto bearing No. AP 23 TV OO25 of respondent No.l. However, the Tribunal \ *a -) I has awarded meager amount of Rs.50,000/- without properly considering the evidence on record. l,earned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance Company 7 " submitted that the Tribunal after taking into consideration the oral and docunientar5r evidence on record, has rightly awarded compensation amount of Rs.50,0OO/. Hence, the appellant is not entitled for enhancement of compensation as claimed by her in this appeal.

8. This Court considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for respondent No.2-lnsurance Company and perused the records. It is not in dispute that the appellartt has sustained i) deep laceration over papliteal toes left, ii) laceration over left bone of wrist, iii) Iaceration over scull and iv) fracture of clavicle left, in the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of Tata mobile auto bearing No. AP 23 TV 0025 of respondent No.1. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount to the fracture of clavicle. Hence, this Court is of the considered vierv that the appellant is entitled for Rs.25,000/- for the fracture injury and Rs. 10,000/- towards simple injuries I sustained by her in addition to the amount awarded to the t appellant by the Tribunal. The appellart is also entitled for 1 ! Rs. 1O,O00/- towards litigatiot.r expenses, as per the principle laid down by the Hon'bre Supreme court in V.Mekata v. M.Malathi and anotherr. Thus, in all, the appellalt is entitled for Rs.95,OOO/-.

9. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A. is allowed in part enhaacing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.5O,O00/- to Rs.9S,OOO /-. the enhanced amount shall carry interest at z.sok p.a. from the date of petition tilr the date of realization. Respondent No.2_Insurance Company is clirected to deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest at first, within a period of two months rrom the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and later to recover the same from respondent No.1 by filing execution petition without filing suit. on such deposit, the appelrant is entitled to withdraw the said amount without furnishing arry security. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pen ding. shall stand closed. I 2q4 (s) ALD +2" X ',1;$i#NIA:3,SiRiI: //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, Iff ,, z onJcito;iiril8 #H:ilij]|::i:?Sg[tl' records, ir anyl I ?#5 33 S;# AjaY KumarAa';".6id;u;i' ":i?'fli%,lY"J?J,,1"i'oent. - * ""' ' .craims rribunar-cum- Xr Additionar chier ADK \., : i ' I' I i HIGH COURT DATED:1010112025 gE SrA /.{: J c 21ilAflM \ * f rlpite (,.1r,O (t o .L .+.6' .& JUDGMENT+DECREE MAGMA.N o.2205 of 20'|.4. 2 DRAFTS t i I I PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS 0 )K IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE l PRESENT ,,= HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO CCIDENT C IVIL MISCE LLANEOUS AP PEAL NO: 2205 0F 2014 , MOTOR A Between: Mangali-.Parvathamma, w/o. M.Gopar, occ: Housewife-cum-Aoricurture Works, Rl/o. Moinabad (Vilage and H,riioil,-ri"',igr'n?,iriv'ijij,"l,ri. ^v ruLIrLUrc AND ...AppellanUClaimant 1 Girimajipally S/o. G.Venkatai.u.h, 9."., Owner of Crime Vehicle Rl/o. H.NO. 2-57.lndrakaran, Sanga Reddy, Medak oiJtriii n.i;.'" " ICICI Lombard General lnsurance Co. Ltd.,, Rep. by its Legal Manager, D.No 3#rr, osman Ptaza, Rd No. r sanla;'Hirlslpri,ir"grn5, Hy.j;ra"b;d_sij0" 2 ., ... Respondents/Respondents Appeal fired Under section 173 of lvrotor Vehicres Act,19B8 against the order and decree in o.p.No.1804 of 2009 dated.26-08-20i3 on tne fire of the court of the chairman, Motor Accident craims Tribunat-cum- ii Aoditionat cr,i"i rroge iiibl, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad. .. . This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower-court and ihl materiat papers in the case and.upon hearing the arguments of Sri M C Acharyulu, Advocaie. for tf," AppJfrnt ( Not present) and of sri K Ajay Kumar, Advocate toi irre nesponaent No.2 and none appeared for the respondent No.1 . This Court doth Order and Decree as follows: 1' That the Motor Accident civir tMisceilaneous Appear be and hereby is parry allowed enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunar from Rs.50,000/- to Rs.95,000/_; 2 That the enhanced amount sha[ carry interest at 7.50/o p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization; 3 That the Respondent No.2-rnsurance company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest at first, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and later to recover the same from respondent No.'1 by filing execution petition without filing suit;

4. That on such deposit, the appellant is entitled to withdraw the said amount without furnishing any security;

5. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. //TRUE COPY// SD/- A SRINIVASA REDDY, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR. \ ,r ,r\ L \ \.'. _-. 1 \i \.sEcTtoN oFFtcER To, '1. The Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- Xl Additional Chief Judge, (FTC), City Civil Courts, Hyderabad

2. fwo CD Copies ADK w HIGH COURT DATED:1010112025 DECREE MACMA.N o.2205 ot 2014 PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS @ dtl{ It