Partly allowed

Tumella Lingamani v. K.Kishan

Telangana HC13 Nov 2013MACMA/133/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an motor accident claims appeal, the court enhanced the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. While affirming the accident finding, the court added amounts for medical expenses, transport, lost income, and loss of amenities, totaling Rs.29,000/- enhancement.

What did the court decide?

Award of additional Rs.29,000/- towards medical, attendant, transport, loss of income and loss of amenities, with interest.

Tumella Lingamani Vs K.Kishan — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR

¶2

MA CMA No.133 of 2005

¶3

JUDGMENT

¶4

Dissatisfied with the compensation of Rs.80,000/- out of the claim of Rs.2,00,000/-, the claimant in O.P.No.34 of 1999 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge) at Nizamabad, preferred this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-.

¶5

2. The brief facts of the case are as follows;

¶6

The claimant was traveling in a bus bearing No.AP 9Z 1122 from Koratpally village towards Nizamabad side on 24.11.1998 at about 12.00 noon and when it reached near Dharmaram village, a lorry tipper bearing No.ATJ 333 being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner at high speed came from opposite direction and dashed against the bus, due to the impact, the claimant received injuries. She was admitted in Government Hospital, Nizamabad and subsequently, she took treatment from ENT Specialist and Orthopedic Surgeon. It is claimed that she spent a sum of Rs.80,000/-towards medical expenses. Contending that she was an agriculturist and beedi roller and was earning a sum of Rs.5,000/-per month and because of the accident, she became permanently disabled, she claimed the compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-.

¶7

3. The first respondent, who is the owner of the lorry, remained ex parte. The second respondent-insurance company

¶8

denied the material averments made by the claimant.

¶9

4. Basing on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues;

¶10

1. Whether the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of the lorry tipper bearing No.ATJ-333 by its driver? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation. If so to what amount and against which of the respondents?

¶11

3. To what relief?

¶12

5. The claimant herself was examined as P.W.1 and

¶13

Dr.L.Ramulu was examined as P.W.2 and Exs.A1 to A19 were marked on behalf of the claimant. None was examined on behalf of the insurance company, but a copy of policy was marked as Ex.B1.

¶14

6. The Tribunal on appreciation of evidence came to the conclusion that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of lorry tipper. There is no cross-appeal. The said finding has become final and there is no need to disturb the same.

¶15

7. On issue No.2, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.65,000/for two fractured injuries and disability, Rs.6,000/- for two simple injuries, Rs.5,000/-for pain and suffering and Rs.4,000/-for medical expenses and extra nourishment. Thus, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.80,000/-.

¶16

8. As seen from the record, the claimant was initially admitted

¶17

i n Government Hospital, Nizamabad and subsequently, she was treated by Dr. Vinodkumar Gupta, ENT Specialist. Ex.A15 shows that P.W.1 was admitted in Dr. Gupta’s ENT Nursing Home on 30.11.1998, an operation was conducted on 01.12.1998 for correction of fractured nasal bones and discharged on 03.12.1998. According to P.W.1, she had spent about Rs.60,000/-towards medical expenses. It appears that the petitioner filed medical bills with regard to purchase of certain medicines. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the claimant filed medical bills for Rs.3,363.25ps only. However, it appears that the claimant underwent operation on 01.12.1998, but she did not file any bill issued by Dr. Vinodkumar Gupta, who operated her. It is also clear that the said Doctor was not examined. But the petitioner’s case is that she had spent about Rs.60,000/-towards medical expenses. Having regard to the fact that she underwent operation and was treated as inpatient for three days, it is just and reasonable to award a sum of Rs.10,000/-towards medical expenses in addition to the amount of Rs.4,000/-granted by the Tribunal i.e., total Rs.14,000/-towards medical expenses. As seen from the award, it is clear that no amount was granted towards attendant charges, loss of income and transport charges. The accident occurred on 24.11.1998. She was discharged from the Government Hospital on 03.12.1998. Subsequently, she was treated by P.W.2-Dr. L. Ramulu. In the circumstances, the claimant is awarded a sum of Rs.3,000/-towards attendant charges, Rs.2,000/-towards transportation charges, Rs.5,000/towards loss of income for the period of treatment and another

¶18

amount of Rs.5,000/-towards loss of expectation of life and loss of amenities, in total, a sum of Rs.25,000/- is awarded to the appellant in addition to the compensation granted by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of the claim petition till realization.

¶19

9. Accordingly, MACMA is allowed in part. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand closed.

¶20

____________________ B.CHANDRA KUMAR, J

¶21

13^th November, 2013 sj

Tumella Lingamani v. K.Kishan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tumella Lingamani v. K.Kishan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Veluri Raja Rajeswari Vs Veluri Santhansagar Reddy

Naaru Venkata Reddy S/o. Poli Reddy Vs Devireddy Venkata Subba Reddy (died)

Smt. Sanampudi Girija Vs G.Ramanaiah

Thammina Vasanth Kumar Vs The State of A.P.

Penaka Naga Sreenivasulu Reddy, Vs Challa Krishan Reddy

Sannapaneni Balakrishnama Naidu, Vs Sannapaneni Sundararama Naidu