The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Appellant: SRI' K HARIMOHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: Sri R' Sheetal Kumar The Court made the following: Judgment I i I i i t I I I I I I i I I I I ,! : t I I ! I I I ! I I t I i I i I t I THE FION'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA J DG MENT:- .A c. A o 4 1 F o2 Heard Sri K, Hari Mohan Reddy, learned counsel for the appr:llant and Sri R.Sheetal Kumar, learned counsel for respondent I,lo.3. Perused the reco r(1.

2. This is an aprpeal preferred by the a ppella ntlpetitioner aggri,lved by the order; datei) 14.02.2023 passed in M.V.O.p.No.2483 of 2015 by the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal_cum_XXV Additionat Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad (for short, ,the Tribunal'), whereirr an amount of Rs.47,g32l_ was awarded rryith interest at 60/o per annum in a claim petition filed seelling compensation of Rs;.7,00,000/_ payable by the respondents jointly and severa lly.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant filed claim petition due to the injuries sustained by him in a road traffic accid,3nt which occurred on t4.05.2OI4 at about 4:10 p.M. while the appellitnt was performing his traffic duty at prashanth Nager y junction. At that time, a Tata Magic s;even seater auto bearing No.Ap 15UB 1074 wh ch was driven in a rash and negligent manner dashed the appelltrnt causing fracture of right hand, head injury and other brunt injuries ail 2 over the body. The appellant filed claim petition and in support thereof got examined P.Ws.1 and 2 and got marked Exs'A1 to AB' ResPondent No.3 got examined R'Ws'1 and 2 and got marked Exs'81 to 86' The Tribunal after examining the evidence adduced awarded compensation of Rs.47,932/- with interest at 60lo per annum leading to filing of the present aPPeal.

4. In grounds of appeal, the appellant pleaded that the Tribunal the partial and permanent disability of 25o/o though failed to consider Ex.A6 is marked to prove disabirity coupred with oral examination oF the doctor as P.W.2' The Tribunal did not consider the income of the appellant at Rs.9,000/- per month as Home Guard and also failed to award loss of earnings for Rs'30'000/-' damage of clothing at Rs.2,000/- and Rs'2.00,000/- towards pain and suffering lt is also that the attendant charges are not awarded and meager of Rs.10,000/- was awarded towards pain and suffering pleaded amount instead of Rs.40,000/- 5. The evidence of P'W'1-appellant is that he suffered fracture of right hand radius, head injury and blunt injuries all over the body' The evidence of P.W.2, an orthopedic Surgeon, who treated the appellant, on consultation, deposed that there is pain in the right elbow joint and there is disability of 25o/o which is partial and permanent in nature' The said disabirity resurts in inability to [ft weight with right hand and i I I I I I I i l 3 restricted movem,3nt oF erbow. The injury is grievous in nature. In cross-exa m ination, he deposed that conservative treatment is prescribed which takes 6 weeks to 2 months for the injury to rear. Further, the Fractrre has united satisfactoriry. As per Ex.46, the disability is 25o/o for the injury which is closed tq the neck of right radius. The evidence as per Ex.46 is that the fracture of mar-urrited whereas the evidr:nce of p.w.2 is that there is proper unron of the fracture and the hearing is we . Except for restricted movemenl:s of elbow, there is no other disabirity. particurarry, there is no disarririty that wourd afFect the duties of the appeilant as a Homeguard. At i)est, the appellant is lik ely to experience discomfort in elbow movem€ nts. Therefore, the perr:entage of functionar disabirity can be taken at 1Oyo. According to the doctor p.w.2, the wound requires about 6 weeks to B weeks for healinq. Therefore, Rs.1g,OOO,/_ is awarded towards loss of earnings. The Tribunar awarded Rs.25,ooo/- towards grielous fracture of right rarrius neck, Rs.1o,ooo/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.5,932l- towards medical expenses, Rs.5,OOO/_ towards transportation charges and the same need not be interfered \^ith. Furthe[ the extra lourishment amount of Rs.2,000/- is enhancecr to Rs.1o,ooo,/- and R.s.2,ooo/- is awarded towards damage to crothing. There is no ground to conclude that there is loss of amenities or social stigma or shock and mental agony which warrants awarding 4 compensation on the said grounds and therefore' the said grounds are not considered.

6. The income of the appellant is Rs.9,000/- per month' which per annum. To quantify the compensation comes to Rs.1,08,000/- towards loss of future prospects due to disabillty' as per age (37 years) and income of the appellant, if 40olo of the income is included as future prospects, the annual income would be Rs'1'51'200/- (Rs'1'08'000/- + 43,200/-). As per the authority in Sarla Verma v' Delhi Transport Corporationl, if the aforesaid annual income is multiplied with relevant multiplier of '15" the loss of future earnings of the appellant due to disability at 10o/o is Rs'2'26'800/- (Rs'1'51'20O/- x 15 x 10/100). In total, the appellant is entitled to Rs'3'02'732l- rounded to Rs.3,02,750/-. 7 Accordingly, the M.A.C'M'A' is partly allowed' The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is hereby enhanced from Rs.47,9321- to the enhanced Rs.3,02,750/- with interest @ 9olo per annum on compensation from the date of petition till the date of realization ' The enhanced compensation amount shall be deposited by the respondents jointly and severally within a perlod of two months from the date of receipt of a coPY of this ludgment' On such deposit, the aPPellant is '{1oos) o s.c c. lzr I 5 entitled to withdraw the entire amount, without furnishingt any security. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions. if any, pending in this appeal, shall stand closed. SD/- M. O MAN ALI BAIG ASS A T REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// E TION C,FFICER 'l

1. The Chairmar, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- XXV Additioral Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. (With records, if any) 2. One CC to SFll. K. HARIMOHAN REDDY Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRl. R. Sheetal Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies To l AS/gh l I I i I I ,_. . ., -.{a ......xx{.{r: . t {'Y'r ./. :'.,, HIGH COURT DATED:2410'7 t2025 _- r j.- ._\ s 1ii tti -ja 1 \.:., <" .t',r, ., ..'i t JUDGMENT + DEGREE MACMA.N o.1441 of 2023 !: -. [2 DRAFTSI PARTLY ALLOWED WITHOUT COSTS. I I I I l i I l I I i ! . l I I I J I I I i t34421 rN rHE H|GH ""rTf3$rtJ*=^BtflE oF TELANGANA THURSDAY,THE TWENW FOURTH DAY OF JULY ...-"TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCEL LANE OUS APP EAL NO: 1441 0F 2023 Between: tsi3,',il'?'3.,"?fl"h',1",0tffi 1[i*it:ir:Li."3..hooccrraff icHomeGuard'R/o ...APPELLANT AND 1 yl,ff d,Tft ifr [fl rygififl H"nli#fl ilxifl ']$.%?1H:i"J'fl""3'3Yi":'"' 2 3 Hyderabad. Tarnalle Umesh, S/o T.Prabhu Aged 20 Years Occ' .Driver Rft i,H# ;;tbi6nv paiincne ru", sansa Reddv Dist' lClCl Lombard General lnsurance Co Ltd 'Rep' by its.l/lanaoer'Osman Plaza' I'tjiT$:3fifJ,tE|'xhri*:l:sij:ri"sr'u'r5:u;,'[ir')"' HvO'eraUia, felangana 500034' R/o Beeramguda' ...RESPONDENTS Appeal filed Under Section 173 of Motor Vq!l*" Act'1988 against the Order and decree in op No z+a.?'iiir; iit"i.t+toztzo23 0n the file of the court of the Motor Accident ctaims rrio,r"".;-"r;- >&V Additional chief Judge. city civil Court' Hyderabad This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal' ii" ir*., court ind ihe material papers in the case the Judgment and Decree "i and upon hearing tte a'gur;tntJJt-f'Harirnon'n Reddy' Advocate forthe 1!t^"13" and of Sri R. Sheetal r"tr.'lOuo"'te for the Respondent No'3 and none appeared for the resPondent Nos' This Court doth Order and Decree as follows: 1 That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and hereby is partly allowed; I I I i i : l 2 That the cornpensation awarded by the Tribunar isbe and hereby enhanced from Rs.47,932/_ to Rs,3,02,750A with interest @ 9o/op.a.,on the enhanced compensation from the date of petition till the date of realization; 3. That the errhanced compensation amount shall be deposite(l by the respondents Jointly and severally wihtin a period of two months fronr the date of receipt of ;r copy of this Judgment; 4 That on such deposit, the appellant is be and hereby enti,ed to wittrdraw the 5 That save as aforesaid, the Judgment and decree of the Tribunar sh,, stands 6. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. entire amouni. without furnishing any security; confirmed in all other respects; and //TRUE COPY// SD/. M. OSMAN A,LI BAIG A NT REGISTRAR re{ t\ S S CTION OFFICER 1 The Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal_cum_ XXV Aclditional Chief Ju,Jge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. (With records, if any) Two CD Copies To, AS/gh HIGH COURT DATED:24 tOT1ZO}S DECREE MACMA.N o.1441 of 20Zl PARTLY ALLOWED WTHOUT COSTS, Lt P \