The High Court · 2025

Petitlon under Section 15'l CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the petitioner/Appellant to enhance the compensation from Rs. 1,95,000/- to Rs. 4,00,000/-. Counsel for the Appellants : SRl. K AMARNATH REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : NONE APPEARED Counselforthe RespondentNo.2 : SRIA. RAMAKRISHNAREDDY The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR RI)] DY I.A.No.3 of 2O1S in/and MACMA No.743 of 2OL9 COMMON JUDGMENT: The .r ppellan t -claimant filed the appeal under Sj( r ron 173 oI the IVoror \/elricles Acl, 198g, fceling aggrieved by tht: r vard date(l 21-06 2015 passecl by the XIII Additional Districr er I Sessron:; Judgc, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B.Nagar (fot hort, ,,1h(l 1'ribr-rnal") in M V O.p.No. tOZ4 of 2008, wherebS, .t : Tr.ibunal grilntcd co[rl)cnsation of Rs. 1 ,95,OOO/_ with proport i nzltc costr] and inrcrest tltercon at 7yo per annum from the date ( I petitton till reerlizat ion.

2. 'lhc lrrit'f facts o[ the casc are that on 25.O2...),t)( t at 19 3() horrrs rlrc irppcllant rvas proceeding on his Hero IJon(l r rrotor_cycle bearirrg No AP I I H 4047 from Osmania University r: lJppal anr:l rl,hen hc reached ne:rr Rajayalau,rmi Theatre, one van h-. ir-ing No.Ap 10 V 8377 dr rven b-r- its driver in a rash and negli I rLt manner d;rsfrt'ci r ht, rir()tor cycle of Lhe appellanr without ltrl c r rng trafhc rulcs nnd as .l result, the appellant sustained mttlt p c fractures and rnjuries all over his body and he was immedialcl , shiftecl to Kamirreni iJospital, L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad, from therc ( w.1s later shifterl to Garrclhi Hospital, Secundcrabad lor treatrn I t where he \.i.-r 7 wastreatedaSaninpatientandhealsotookfollor,r,uPtreatment' Stating the said facts, [he appeLlant filed the alorcsaid MVC)P the owncr before the Tribunal, against respondcnt Nos l and 2 i e ' oftheoffendingvehicleandtheinsuranceCompan,l,cspectively, seektng compensation oI Rs-l'50'O00/- for the injuries suslained in turn, allowed thc said pctition' by by him and the Tribunal, Rs.l,95,O0O/ torvards compensation awarding an amount of together with interest al7'/o pcr annum lrom thc date of pt:tition till thc date of recovery, payabte by rcspondents No l and 2 jointly and scverally. The appellant seeks enhancement of the samc frorn Rs.1,95,000/- to Rs 4,00,000/- by way of Amendment Petition vide I.A.No.3 of 20 I5 in this aPPcal 3 There is no representation for the appellal]t /claimant

4.LearnedStandingCounsclappearingforthclnsurancc Company/ respondent No 2 submitted that the appellant filed thc 2008 claiming an amount of aforesaid M.V.O P No 1074 of Rs.1,50,00O/- towards compcnsation for the injuries sustaincd by him in the accident; even though thc Tribunal after considering the material on record has rightly granted an amount of Rs 1'95'000/-' which is over and above the amount claimed by the appellant' the appellant filed this appeal seeking further enhancement o[ the same by way of amendment petltion' which is impermissible in l Ierrvl and as strch, tlrerc is no justifiable ground for enhan-l rncnt of compcnsat iorr iIr this aPl)cal [n apptals fllt:d under Section 173 of the Motor Vc I clcs Act' 5. the appcllatc c()tlrt mrtst carefutll' examine u'hether 1161" ras been a misapprcciirtio n of cviclence or matcrial non-consider;t i rrl lly the Tribunal. In tir(r instant case, on zr careful examinilli rr o[ the record.thlsCortrtfirrdsnomaterialirlegularityorerl(rrr:ffactor la$, in the 'lribtrrtitl's tlssessment and the impugned 21' 2 -rl passed by thc 'lriburral granring compensation of Rs 1(r5 o00/- is reasonablc, kccpit.ig in view the nature and e>:r' r of the appcl)arnt's rrt.itrries ancl his treatment As the appell:r r orillLnally claimecl lls l.5o,0oo/- and the Tribunal already 2q72f i' C a higher amount, thc l\rrthcr rccluest for e nhancement to Rs '1 ( C '0OO/- ir this appcal ilpl)ears exccssive and does not merit cons::l I ation-

6. ln tht' rt st'ttt, I A.No 3 of 2015 and MACMA Nc ' '13 oI 2O1') arr: dlsmiss.d No orcle t as to costs' As ;r st'<1rrt [, t bc misccllaneous petitions pt r c Llrg t[ an'1' shall stat)d ( losc(l SD/. C. DEEPIKA S,I ;TANT REGISTRAR ,Af //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER \i To, u,

1. The Xlll Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ranga Re ldy District, L'B N agar.

2. One CC to SRl. K ATvIARNATH REDDY Advocate [OF t C] 3. One CC to SRl. A RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, Advocatrr OPUCI 4. Two CD CoPies HIGH COURT DATED:1811112025 JUDGMENT l.A.No.3 OF 2015 IN/AND MACMA.No.743 of 2019 iATE ;j ) a) ?trs 'r1.1 6 l:', ,.] .r '<j ,,; , DISMISSING THE I.A. & APPEAL C.. 1 \(L '),b v IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY l.A.No. 3 OF 2015 IN/AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 743 OF 2019 Between: Ivl VENKAT REDDY, S/o Chenna Reddy, aged about 23 yrs., Occ: Student, RJo Hazarigudem Village, Anumula Mandal, Nalgonda District, Presently residing at C-Hostel, Room No,143, Osmania University Campus, Hyderabad APPELLANT AND

1. CMS SECURITIES LIMITED, Rep. by Vikas Jain, 160, Rasoolpura, S.P. Road, Secunderabad.

2. The National lnsurance Co. Ltd, Rep. by its Divisional Manager Divisional Office No. lV, Twin City tvlarket Complex, M.J.Market, Hyderabad - 500001. RESPONDENTS Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, aggrieved by the orders of the Xlll Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L. B. Nagar in OP. No. 1 Ol 4|2OOB, D1.24 -OG -20 1 5, ORDER: This appeal couring on for hearing and upon perusing thc grounds of appcal, the Judgrnent and Decree oI the Lorver Court and the material papers in thc Petition and upon hearing thc arguments of Sri Mckala Vcnkat Reddy, Advocate for the Appellant and ofSri A. Ramakrishna Reddy for Respondent No.2 and for Respondent No.l is non appcarcd. That this Court doth ordcr and decree as follows: l. That this appcal and I A. No.3 of20l5 arebeand hereby dismissed

2. That there shall be no ordcr as to costs l. Thc XIII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District, L.B ASSISTANT R SD/- C. DEEPIKA RAR 9LC ltLD ol gar. I'r+ To

2. Two CD Copies 6 HIGH COURT DATED:1811112025 DECREE l.A.No. 3 OF 2015 IN/AND MACMA.No.743 of 2019 DISMISSING THE I.A. & APPEAL v),'