The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Appellant : Mr. S. Surender Reddy Counsel for the Respondent No. 1 : None appeared Counsel for the Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Ch. Venkata Narayana The Court delivered the following: i:. HON'BLE SRI IUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPI., -HI RAO IUDCMENT M.A. C.M.A.N o.534 oF 2022 'Ihis appcal is clirccted against the order ar r, decree dated )6.07.?022 in I\1.\/.C) p No.550 of 2075, passed by thc. i 11i11.13r.,, Moror Acciclerrts Clarrns l.ribu na l_cum-lV_ trrincipa I District artrl licssisns Juligs, Nizarnabad (ior shor.t,the l.ribunal,), r,r,herein the clainr r f appella,t was allor'c.cl_in_part, arr,arding compensation of Rs.62,0007. r.ith intert:st at 7.5% per annurn fronr tlrt, date o[ petition.

2. Heard N4r.S.Sure.tler Redcly, Iearned counsel for trr ,appella.t l\1r.. (_1.\16,11L.11u \trravana, learnc,cl counsel for r,,., onc]ent No.2_ insurarrcc comf)an,\,. I)i,rrrsecJ the n_ratc.rial on rccorcl.

3. 'l ho a frpella ntlcla imant filed the claim appl < rtion seeking compcnscrtio, of I(s 2,()0.0C0/_ on nccount of thc i.jurics.r stainecl b' hcr i. a motor vehiclc accirlt,.t that occurred on 05.03.20-10. i r:orcli,11 to thc a ppella rr t-crai'1't n t' orl that fateful clay wrr,e she was tr.a'r r ,g arong lvith other l.t bou rs i, D('\l \zan bearing registration Nc ,\p_2g_I_6157 (l-rereina fter rr--[cr-rtcl Io as ,crime vehicle') from Nizarr bacl towards Mudhole, apc.l rvhen Lhcv reached Nagepur village limit.., lhe driver of thc crimr, r,t'hi,.1,,.t,.,,r.,. i(, sanrc in rash and negligent n. nner ancj lost .- 2 control over it, due to which' the crirne vehiclc went off the road and turrred turtle, as a result' the appellant/claimant and other inmates of the saicl ',,ehicle sustainecl multiplc fracture and gricvous ir-ljuries all over the '

4. That the claimant sustained multiple fractures to her left hand fracture of right thigh' fracture oi telt jaw' teeth are looscned' multiple and grievous injuries on chest' lmmediately' appellant u'as shifled to Government Hospital' Nizamabad and later' she was admitted in Amrutha Laxmi Multispecialty Hospital, Nizamabad, u,herc she was trca[cd as inpatienl trom O5 03 2OlO to 07 03 2O10 and undcrwent she has incurred major operations' The appellant contends that med ical and extra expenditure of Rs 1'OO'0OO/ - torvards treatment' nourishmcnl' As seen lrom thc rccord, a casc in Crinre No 38 of 2010 was registered by Navipet Policc against the driver of thc crime vehicle under Sections 304-A and 337 of IPC and the investigation was taken u pon.

5. The respondent No'1-owner of the crime vehicle has remained er parte. Therespondent No 2-the insurer of the crime vehicle f iled counter- affidavit opposing the claim ar.rd denying thcir liabilitv to iray the comPensation. I t I , I 3

6. Or.r the basis of the above pleadings, the Tribt r al framed the following iss ut,s i) ii) iii) lVhether. thc' pctitioner mct with accident ca r- ;:cl by DCM Van bearing NO.Ap_28_T_6157 ? tVhe.thr-.r thi. pctitioner is entitled for comp,, sation as clairntcl for ancl from whom ? 'fo wha t relief ?

7. During enquir\', a ppella nt/cla imant herself was e\ r rrincd as p.W.1 and Exs.A1 to A5 rvt,r.c marked on her bchalf. Or behalf of the respondent No.2-insurance company, R.W.l was exanr r ecl ancl Ilx.81_ copy of insurancc. polict, was marked. 8 on a consicrt'r'ati.. of the oral anrr documentary er i r:nc.e availabre on record, tht I'rilrunal helcl that the accident occurred .:.:c to rash and negligent drivinll .r trre t'rimc'ehicre by its driver. Thc ; rid finding has become final, as rro appc.al is filcd by thc, insurer i.g., /nd ;r,1 p,ondent.

9. The ['ribunal awarclecl an amount of Rs.40,000/_ tt r ,,rrds pain and suffering and an anrount of Rs.5,000/_ towards transport r i,:n, Rs.5,000/_ towards extra .ourishurc.t and Rs.12,000/- towards loss r f earni,gs and thus, awardecl total compensation amount of Itr; i2,000/_. The appellant/claima n t beirrl. not satisfied with the awar.<, preferred the present Appeal, secking errhanccmcnt of compensation. 4

10. The learned counsel for the appcllanL u,ould submit thar th€l appellant/ claimant sustained multiple fractures and grievous injurics in a road accident caused by rash and negligent driving of the crime vchiclc and incurred substantial expcnditure tor,tards mcdical treatment. Hou.cver, the Tribunal, without properly considering the oral and documentary evidence adduced on behall of the appellant, errcd in awarding a meager amount of compensation, contrary to the evidence on record and thercfore, the appcllant prays for enhanccmcnt o[ compensation as claimed before the Tribunal.

11. Per contrn, learned counsel for the respondent No.2-insuratrce company w'ould subrnit that on due consideration of the rnaterial placr:d on record, the Tribunal has rightly awarded the compensation amount ar-rd thc appellant has failed to make out any case warranting interfereltce of this Court arrd prayed to dismiss the appcal.

72. On perusal of the record the appellant/ clairnant sustained the following injuries in a road accident i.e., 1) laceration wound dorsum and 2) soft tissue injury right tibia, which are simple in naturc, as evidcnt from Ex.A3-injury certificate and Ex.A4,X-rays. The evidence on record also discloses that the claimant was admitted as inpatient for two days in Amrutha l-axmi Multi Specialty Hospital, Nizamabad 5

13.Thecontentionoftl-relearnedcounselfortheaPl'llantthatthe appeltant receivecl fractural and grievous iniuries, but the ,r rpe]lant failed to examine thc Doctor, rt'ho treated her to substantiate lr I case As the injuriesbeing,simplcinnaturc,thcfribunalawarrrclRs.40,000/. towards pain anc-l suffenng, and Rs.5,000/- towards tra";Portatiorr and Rs.5,000/- torvards extra nourishment and the ap1" 1[ant has not produced anv mcdical bills krwartls thc expenditurc in':; t red by hr:r' the ,rribunal has not awardcd any amount towards the mr:,i cal bills, which in considered opinion of this Court is not proper antl lrat though the medical bills arc not procl trccd as the iniured rvas adm i lr:d as inpatient for three days, she might have incurrecl some expendi r re. Consic'lering the same, tl-re Court fixes an amount of Rs.20,00 I '- towards the hospita Iization ch.i r11t's

14. The other.onterltion raisccl by the learnecl counst I f cr the appellant that the Tribunal erretl in aw'artling a meager amorr' I of Rs.'l 2,000/- towards loss oI itrcomc'' Ihe injurics sustainecl by the a1r 't:llant art: simPlc in nature, as evident from Ex.A3-iniury certificate. 'l h,' rppellant though contended that she n'as working as a labourer a rd was earning Rs.20,000/- pcr month, shc has rrot procluccd any evicl'i ce to substantiate her claim of earrring Rs.20,000/- per month. Considerir 3, the fact ihat the 6 appeltant had sustaincd tn'o simPle injuries, the Tribunal has rightly assessed her monthly income at Rs.6,000/- and awarded a sum of - Rs.12,000/ tow,ards loss of earni|rgs. T herefore, the 'f ribunaI was iustified in awarclir]g an amount of Rs.12,000/- torvards loss of earnings and needs no ilrterferencc bY this Court

15. In view ol Lhc loregoing discussion, this Court is of the considercd opinion that the appetlant is entitled to Rs 20,000/- towards the treatment unclergone for three days liom 05'03 20 IO to 07 03 2010 at Amrutha Laxmi Multispccialtv Hospital, Nizamabad Accordingll'' the comperlsa[ion alrount is euhanced from Rs'62,0O0/- to Rs 82'O00i -'

16. Accordingly, thc Appeal is partly allowt:d and the enhanced amounL shall carry thc same intcrcst as pcr thc'l'ribunzrl decree and the insurancc company shall dcposit the said amoLlnt within two months lrom the date of rcceipt of copy of this order' There shall be no ordet as to costs Pc.nding miscellaucous applications 1f 17 sfra.ll standtlosed' Sd/. M. OSM ASSISTANT AN ALI BAIG REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// I SECTION OFFICER To, m - ( P ri n c i p ar District 2 "3i1 lll ih $:::.ti?"::: {T I ll5" ;"J;ffiM; S. Surender Reddv' Advocate [oPU^c].,. i" iJr. cn Venkata Narayana' Advocate [oPUCl il:; Two CD CoPies ]i .'l:.cu i " 4 DL w t Fj o\ ) '-) 0 6 ,r).:t\,. * \roFs" .\-\-- ,iil HIGH COURT DATED:10/ 10/2025 JUDGMENT MACMA.No.534 of 2022 PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA KS eltl* [ 3485 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 534 OF 2022 Between: Koyalkar Anuradha, Wo. K. Laxman, Age. 37 years, Occ. Labour on contract basis, Vegetable and Milk Business, etc., R/o. H.No. 6-22-653/1, Gouthamnagar, Nizamabad. ...APPELLANT/PETITION E R AND f. Abdul Rasheed, S/o. Abdul Khadeer, Age. Major, Occ. Owner of DCM Van Bearing No. AP-28-T-61 57, Rl/o. H.No.6-12-41l42, Namdevwada, Nizamabad {. The New lndia Assurance Company Limited, Rep. by its Divisional Manager, \ Divisional Office, Opp. ZP Oftice. Subashnagar. (Policy No. 61 060031 090200001409 Valid upto 20.07.2010) ...Respondents/Respondents Appeal f iled under Seclion 173 of M.V.Act, against Order and Decree dated 26.07.2022 passed in M.V.O.P. No. 550 of 2015on the file of the court of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- (Principal Districl Judge) at Nizamabad. 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 Mr. S. Surender Reddy, Advocate for the Appellant and lr/r. Ch. Venkata Narayana, Advocate appeared for Respondent No. , None appeared for the Respondent No. 1 . This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

1. That the Motor Accident Civil Mrscellaneous Appeal be and is Partly allowed by enhancing the compensation amount from Rs. 62,0001 to 82,0001;

2. That the enhanced compensation amount shall carry the i'r, r-est @ l.Sok pet annum from the date of petition till deposit or realization;

3. That the lnsurance company shall deposit the said amouni vithin two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order;

4. That save as aforesaid, the decree of the Tribunal shall st i rris confirmed in all other respects; and

5. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. //TRUE COPY// Sd/- IV. OSMAN ALI BAIG ASSIsi.'ANT REGISTRAR ( FFICER To, 2 DL The Chairman, [t/otor Accident CIaims Tribunal-cum (principal District Judge) at Nizamabad. Two CD Copies [4t' HIGH COURT DATED:10/10/202s DECREE MACMA.No.534 of 2022 PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA l-x s oltlte