Govt. of A.P & Anr. v. Mir Mohsin Ali Khan

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY M.A.C.M.A.No.3882 of 2009 JUDGMENT: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the order dated 27.08.2001 passed in O.P.No.1717 of 1997 on the file of the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional Special Judge for SPE and ACB Cases-cum-V Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, whereby and where under the learned Additional Chief Judge allowed the claim petition of the claimant filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, ‘the Act’) and awarded compensation of Rs.4,76,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.

a) Respondent herein is the claimant in O.P.No.1717 of 1997. On

01.03.1997 at about 7.45 A.M., Mir Mohsin Ali Khan-claimant was proceeding on Hero Honda motor cycle bearing No.AP 9 M 3323 from Liberty towards Tank Bund, Hyderrabad. On reaching Traffic Police Station, near Tank Bund, a jeep bearing No.AP 9 P 1947 came from Tank Bund side and dashed the motor cycle, as a result, the claimant fell down and sustained severe injuries. He filed O.P.No.1717 of 1997 claiming compensation of Rs.5,70,638/- for the injuries sustained by him. b) The 1st respondent in the O.P. remained ex parte. Whereas, the 2nd respondent filed counter disputing the claim of the claimant. c) The learned Additional Chief Judge framed the following issues for consideration: 1) Whether the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle? 2) Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation amount as prayed for, if so, to what amount and from whom? 3) To what relief? d) On behalf of the claimant, four witnesses were examined as PWs.1 to 4 and 24 documents were marked as Exs.A1 to A24. On behalf of the respondents, three witnesses were examined as RWs.1 to 3 and one document was marked as Ex.X1. e) The learned Additional Chief Judge, on considering the material brought on record and on hearing the counsel appearing for the parties, recorded a finding that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the jeep bearing No.AP 9 P 1947 and the claimant is entitled to compensation of Rs.4,76,000/-. A further finding is that the respondents in the O.P. are liable to pay the compensation with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. The order passed in O.P.No.1717 of 1997 has been assailed in this appeal.

Heard learned Government Pleader for Arbitration appearing for the appellants and learned counsel appearing respondent/claimant.

Learned Government Pleader for Arbitration appearing for the appellants submits trial Court has overestimated compensation and also awarded interest at excessive rate.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/claimant supported the order impugned in the appeal.

I have gone through the order impugned in the appeal and the material brought on record. The only issue that calls for adjudication in this appeal is, whether the compensation awarded to the claimant is excessive?

The claimant got himself examined as PW.1. He also examined the doctor, who treated him as PW.4. He placed on record the bunch of medical bills, numbering 177. The total amount spent by him towards medical expenses alone comes to Rs.1,49,209.69. As on the date of the accident, the claimant was drawing a monthly salary of Rs.2,500/- and he was aged about 23 years. Because of the injuries received by him, he lost his total earning capacity. PW.3 is the Chief Accountant in Softline Software Services Pvt. Ltd. He speaks of the earnings of the claimant/PW.1. Ex.A10 is the appointment letter issued by Softline Software Services Pvt. Ltd., and Ex.A11 is the termination letter. The learned Additional Chief Judge has taken the disability of the claimant at 60% to arrive the loss of earnings. In the given facts and circumstances, the compensation of Rs.4,76,000/- granted by the learned Additional Chief Judge is reasonable and appropriate.

After economic reforms in our country, the interest resume has changed and the rates have substantially reduced and therefore, I am of the view that the interest awarded on the compensation is required to be reduced from 9% to 7.5% p.a.

Accordingly, the MACMA is allowed in part reducing the rate of interest on the compensation amount from 9% to 7.5% p.a. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:10th December, 2009. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY M.A.C.M.A.No.3882 of 2009 Dated:10th December, 2009.