That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. //TRUE COPY// v. KAV THA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR -l

Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. V ATCHUTA RAM Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Smt. MAAMU VANI The Court made the following: ORDER {) THE HON'BLE SRT JUSTICE J' SREENTVAS RAO M.A.c. M.A. No.2232of 20L4 JUDGMENT: Dissatisfied with the judgment and decree dated 21 .O2.2O11 passed by the Chairman' Motor Accident Claims Tribunai-cum XXII Additional Chief Judge' City Criminal Court at Hvclerabad (for short 'the Tribunal') in O'P' No 43 of 2oog,thecl:eimantfiledthisappealseekingenhancelmentof comPensatlo n

2. Heard Sri V.Atchuta Ram, learned counsel for the appellant arLd Smt. I.Maamu Vani' learned counsel appearing onbehalfofrespondentNo.2-InsuranceCompany'Irrspiteof service o[ nottce, respondent No'l has not chosen to enter appearance

3. Brief facts of case: On 3l-.05.2008 a-fternoon the appellant and his friends were travelling b,v a car bearing No' AP 28 AQ 9128 from Chevella tc' Hyderabad and at about 5-30 p'm' t'hen they reached near the outskirts of Kanakamamidi Village' a lorry bearing No. AP 12 lJ g4}l being driven by its driver came in a 2 rash and negligent mannei at high speed from the opposite direction on the wrong side of the road and dashed their car, as a result of which, the appe[ant and other inmates of the car have sustained grievous injuries and fractures. Immediately the appellant was shifted to premier Hospital at Mehidipatnam and after giving hrst aid, he was shifted to Udai Clinic Orthopedic Center, where hc was admitted AS rnpatient and underwent surgery and was discharged on 14.06.2008. On complaint, the police, Moinabad registered a case in Crime No. log of 200g against the driver of the lorry for the offence under Section 337 IpC. prior to the accident, he was hale ard healthy, aged about 26 years and was running his as Airtel retail distributor and earning Rs.15,OO0/_ per month. Thus, the appellant has filed O.P.No.43 of 2OOg against the respondents claiming compensation of Rs.7,50, OOO/_. own business

4. Considering the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal has allowecl the O.p. in part and awarded compensation of Rs.5,45,00O7: 1o be payable by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severally. 3 l,earned counsel for the appellant vehemently contended 5. that the appellant has sustained grievous injuries namely fracture of dislocation of right hip and dislocation of 1"t MTPJ left big toe in. the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of lorry bearing No' AP 12 U 94Ol and PW-2 specifically deposed in his evidence that the appellant has sustained grievous injuries and he assessed the disability of the appeliant at 1O%' However' the Tribunal without considering the evidence of PW-2' awarded only Rs.1,00,o00/towardsdisabilitysustainedbytheappellalt. If the disabil.ity as stated by PW-2 is taken into consideration' the appellant is entitled for Rs'2'50'000/- for the disability sustained bv him Therefore' the appellant is entitled for just and reasonzrble comPensation'

6. Per contra, Iearned counsel for resPondent No'2 submitted that though the appellant has not fited the disability certificate, the Tribunal after taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence on record' has rightty au'arded an amount of Rs' 1'OO'OO0 / - for the disabiiity sustained by the appetlant' Therefore' the appellant I i u I I I 4 rs not entitled for enhancement of compensation as claimed by him in this appeal.

7. This Court considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and perused the records. It is not in dispute that the appellalt has sustained grievous injuries namely fracture of dislocation of right hip and dislocation of l"t MTPJ left big toe in the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of lorry bearing No. Ap 12 U 94Ol and he was admitted as inpatient on 31.5.200g, undergone operation for the said fractures to which femonal had with screws, GC fixed and also fixed K wire to his left big toe and he was discharged on 14.06.2oog. pw-2 has specifically deposed that the appellant has sustained grievous injuries and he assessed the disability of appellant at lOok partial permanent disability. By virtue of the said fracture injuries, the appellant is unable to continue his works as earlier. In such circumstances, the Tribunal ought to have considered the disability of appellant at lOo/o. Merely non- filing the disability certilicate rejecting the claim of the appellant for the disability sustajned by him, is not sustainable under law. Hence, this Court is of the consider ed 5 view that the disability of the appellant can be taken at lOo/o to assess the compensation The Tribunal had taken the income of the appellant at Rs' 1O,O0O/- per month considering his business as Airtel distributor, which is just and reasonable.Sincethedeceasedwasagedabout26yearsat the time of accident, the appropriate multiplier in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in Sarla VerTna a' Delhi T?ansport Corporation' would be "17" ' Then the loss of earning capacity would be Rs 2,O4,OOO/- (Rs'10000/- x 12 x 17 multiplj.er x 10%). Further, the appellalt is e:rtitled for Rs.1O,OOO/ - towards litigation charges as per the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in V'Mekala v' M.Malathi and anotherz. The amount awarded by the Tribunal under the heads of medical expenses and loss of income is not disturbed. Thus, in all, the appellant is entitled for Rs.6,59,0O0/ -. In the result, the M.A'C'M'A' is a-llowed in part 8. enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribuna,l from Rs.5,45,000/- to Rs'6,49,OOO/-' The ' 2oo9 acJ t293 (sc) 2 20t+ (s) nL-o.tl sc I I \ t' I I I 6 enhanced afilount sha]l carry interest at 7.So/o p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization against the respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severaJly. Respondent Nos.l and 2 are directed to deposit the enhaaced compensation amount with accrued interest within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment' on such deposit, the appenant is entitred to withdraw the said amount without furnishing any security. No costs. Miscellaneous closed. petitions, if any pending, shall stand //TRUE COPY// sd/_ v. ASSISTANT RE VITHA ISTRAR SECTION OFFICER ;i;;Tf$;tfl.*fl:;f g#i*rffi #l6'sjgf',rlitsrr,ri'"' To HIGH COURT DATED:10 tO1t2O2S JUDGMENT MACMA.No.2232 ot 2014 -.a- l' <Y,' -/' A- ' 4,. .)' : S fAI(, () 2 0 tEB ?[25 ,.,-), ,',1t \- ,,!- - t't:t- \- \ 6) €r/ .: .,/ I I I I I i I ( ALLOWED.IN.PART IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry F|VE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREEN]VAS RAO MOTOR ACC IDENT CIVIL MISCE LLANEOU APPEAL O:2232 oF 2014 Between: T Vamsi Krishna. S/o Narashimulu, Aged about 2g years, Occ: Business, R/o 34-977 I 1, Bharkatpura, Hyd. AND 1 2 ...APPELLANT/CLAIMANT l!"itr["r1il#":fry"?:flj:'i Miva, Ased: Major, occ: Business, R/o 1e-2- The New lndia lnsurance c Madan Mohan Buirdinss, * f HX,dlq"bv luanager' (T'P'claims), 2nd Floor, ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Appear fired under section 173 0f Motor Vehicres Act against the order and decree passed in o.p.No 43 0f 2009 dated:21.02.201 1 0n the fire of the court of the XXll Additionar chief Judge, cUM Motor Accident craims Tribunar, city Criminal Court, at Hyderabad. This appear coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appear, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower court and the materiar papers in the case and upon hearing the arguments of sri. V.Atchuta Ram, Advocate for the Apperant and of Smt MAAMU VANI, Advocate for the Respondent No.2 and None Appeared for the Respordent No. j . i I i : i l l I l This Court doth Order and Decree as follows

1. That the Motor Accident civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and hereby is allowed inpartenhancingthecompensationamountawardedbytheTribunalfrom Rs.5,45,000/- to Rs.6,49,000/-;

2. That the enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 7.5o/o p.a. from the date of Petition till the date of realization against the respondent Nos.1 and 2 Jointly and.severally;

3. That the respondent Nos.l & 2 are directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment;

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

5. That save as aforesaid, the decree of the Tribunal shall stands confirmed in all other resPects; and

6. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. //TRUE COPY// sd/- v. KAV|THA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR -l\1 o SECTION OFFICER To

1. The Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-XXll Additional Chief Judge, City Criminal Court, Hyderabad.

2. Two CD Copies HIGH COURT DATED:1010112025 DECREE MACMA.N o.2232 ot 2014 ALLOWED-IN-PART rA LlN