AP AND TELANGANA HIGH COURT - MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIM = Since the petitioner sustained grievous injury i.e., left femur, he might have bed ridden for a longer period. It is pertinent to note that the appellant is working as a private Typist and he has suffered a grievous injury to his left femur. Therefore, the compensation of Rs.5,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and suffering is enhanced to Rs.30,000/-. Further, the Tribunal has not assigned any reasons for not considering the bunch of Medical Bills worth Rs.39,000/- filed by the appellant, except stating that the Medical Officer was not examined. The reasoning assigned by the Tribunal in awarding Rs.21,000/- as against the Medical Bills of worth Rs.39,000/- appears to be arbitrary. I do not see any valid reason in disallowing the said Medical Bills, for the reason that even as per the finding of the Tribunal, the appellant had received a grievous injury to his left femur and was bed-ridden for about six months. Therefore, the Medical Bills worth Rs.39,000/- is granted. 9. Further, the Tribunal has taken into consideration the notional income of the appellant as Rs.1,500/- per month, which appears to be on lower side. Therefore, the same is enhanced to Rs.3,000/- per month and for 6 months, it comes to Rs.18,000/- towards loss of earnings. 10. Thus the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under various heads is now enhanced as mentioned below: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Compensation towards Amount awarded Amount awarded by the Tribunal by this Court Rs. Rs. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Pain and suffering 5,000.00 30,000.00 2. Medical Bills 21,000.00 39,000.00 3. Loss of earnings for 9,000.00 18,000.00 six months ------------- ------------ TOTAL : 35,000.00 87,000.00 ------------- ------------ 11. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed in part, enhancing the amount of compensation from Rs.35,000/- to Rs.87,000/- (Rupees eighty seven thousand only) with proportionate costs and interest @ 9% per annum on the enhanced amount also from the date of petition till the date of realization. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally held liable to pay compensation and they are directed to deposit the compensation amount within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount of compensation. No order as to costs.

http://judis.nic.in/HCS/list_new2.asp?FileName=14377&Table_Main_Txt=apordtext
HONBLE SRI JUSTICE GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD
M.A.C.M.A.No.266 OF 2006
05-10-2017
Yedama Laxma Reddy Appellant
Panasa Buchaiah and another Respondents
Counsel for the appellant:Sri Chalakani Venkat Yadav
Counsel for the respondents : Smt. S.A.V. Ratnam,
SC for R.2
<GIST:
>HEAD NOTE:

? Cases referred
HONBLE SRI JUSTICE GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD

M.A.C.M.A. No.266 of 2006

JUDGMENT :
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for brevity the Act), is preferred by
the appellant-petitioner seeking enhancement of compensation
challenging the order and decree dated 25.10.2004 in
O.P.No.159 of 2004 (old O.P.No.1477 of 2002) passed by the
Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional
District Judge, Suryapet, Nalgonda District (for brevity the
Tribunal), awarding compensation of Rs.35,000/- as against
the claim of Rs.1,00,000/- laid by him under Section 166 of
the Act, for the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident
that occurred on 18.09.2002.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 18.09.2002 at
about 11.30 a.m., while the appellant was proceeding on his
Hero Honda Motor Cycle bearing No.AP-24G-6875 with his
friend from Khammam Cross Road to Lorry Association Office
and when they reached just opposite to Fuse Call Office, Kodad
Town, one Auto bearing No.AP-24U-8102 of respondent No.1
came in a rash and negligent manner with high speed driven by
its driver and dashed the said motor cycle, as a result of which
the appellant sustained grievous injuries and fractures. On
report about the accident, the Police of Kodad Town P.S.
registered a case in Crime No.140/2002 for the offence
punishable under Section 338 IPC against respondent No.1
Owner of the Auto. The appellant filed the aforesaid O.P.No.159
of 2004 claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for the
injuries sustained by him in the said accident against
respondent Nos.1 and 2, who are owner and insurer,
respectively, of the crime Auto.
3. Before the Tribunal, respondent No.1 owner of the
crime Auto was set exparte and respondent No.2 Oriental
Insurance Company Limited (insurer) filed its counter denying
the allegations made in the claim petition. On consideration of
the evidence of P.W.1 and the documentary evidence under
Exs.A.1 to A.8 filed on behalf of the appellant-petitioner, and
Ex.B.1 True copy of Insurance Policy filed on behalf of the 2nd
respondent - insurer, by order and decree dated 25.10.2004,
the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.35,000/- under
various heads with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of
the petition till realization fixing liability against respondent
Nos.1 and 2. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant-petitioner
has preferred the present appeal seeking enhancement of
compensation.
4. Heard Sri Chalakani Venkat Yadav, learned counsel for
the appellantpetitioner, as well as Smt. S.A.V. Ratnam,
learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 Insurer.
Perused the order under challenge and also the evidence on
record.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
Tribunal has not awarded adequate compensation and hence
the compensation is required to be enhanced. He would
further submit that though the appellant had suffered grievous
injury to his left femur, which is evident from Ex.A.2 Certified
copy of Injury Certificate dated 18.09.2002, and filed Ex.A.6
Bunch of Medical Bills worth Rs.39,000/-, the Tribunal has
granted only Rs.21,000/- towards medical expenses. The
learned counsel also submits that the Tribunal has awarded
Rs.5,000/- towards pain and suffering, which is required to be
enhanced. It is further argued that the income of the appellant
was taken as Rs.1,500/- per month for the purpose of
calculation of loss of earnings and accordingly awarded
Rs.9,000/- only, which is required to be enhanced.
6. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd
respondent insurer submits that the compensation awarded
by the Tribunal is adequate and that the rate of interest
awarded by the Tribunal @ 9% per annum is also on higher
side and hence the impugned order does not require any
interference.
7. On consideration of the arguments advanced by the
learned counsel for the respective parties and also the evidence
available on record, there is no dispute with regard to causing
of the accident and the only issue to be decided in this appeal
is regarding adequacy of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal.
8. The Tribunal in para-7 of its order had clearly observed
with regard to the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant
and the suffering undergone by him as follows:
.. Since the petitioner sustained grievous injury i.e.,
left femur, he might have bed ridden for a longer period.
It is pertinent to note that the appellant is working as a private
Typist and he has suffered a grievous injury to his left femur.
Therefore, the compensation of Rs.5,000/- awarded by the
Tribunal towards pain and suffering is enhanced to
Rs.30,000/-. Further, the Tribunal has not assigned any
reasons for not considering the bunch of Medical Bills worth
Rs.39,000/- filed by the appellant, except stating that the
Medical Officer was not examined. The reasoning assigned by
the Tribunal in awarding Rs.21,000/- as against the Medical
Bills of worth Rs.39,000/- appears to be arbitrary. I do not see
any valid reason in disallowing the said Medical Bills, for the
reason that even as per the finding of the Tribunal, the
appellant had received a grievous injury to his left femur and
was bed-ridden for about six months. Therefore, the Medical
Bills worth Rs.39,000/- is granted.
9. Further, the Tribunal has taken into consideration the
notional income of the appellant as Rs.1,500/- per month,
which appears to be on lower side. Therefore, the same is
enhanced to Rs.3,000/- per month and for 6 months, it comes
to Rs.18,000/- towards loss of earnings.
10. Thus the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under
various heads is now enhanced as mentioned below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Compensation towards Amount awarded Amount awarded
by the Tribunal by this Court
Rs. Rs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Pain and suffering 5,000.00 30,000.00
2. Medical Bills 21,000.00 39,000.00
3. Loss of earnings for 9,000.00 18,000.00
six months
------------- ------------
TOTAL : 35,000.00 87,000.00
------------- ------------

11. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed in
part, enhancing the amount of compensation from Rs.35,000/-
to Rs.87,000/- (Rupees eighty seven thousand only) with
proportionate costs and interest @ 9% per annum on the
enhanced amount also from the date of petition till the date of
realization. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally
held liable to pay compensation and they are directed to
deposit the compensation amount within one month from the
date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit, the
appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount of
compensation. No order as to costs.
12. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall
stand closed.
______________________________
GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD, J
05.10.2017.