Allowed

Boya Mallikarjuna v. M. Daurya Naik and Another

Telangana HC4 Jun 2018CMA/3072/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court enhanced motor accident compensation from Rs. 14,040 to Rs. 29,040. Modifying the Tribunal's order under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the Court awarded higher sums for grievous and simple injuries and added Rs. 5,000 for pain and suffering while upholding the medical expense award.

What did the court decide?

Award of enhanced total compensation of Rs. 29,040/- with 9% annual interest from the date of petition until realization.

Boya Mallikarjuna Vs M. Daurya Naik and Another — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

THE HON’BLE Dr . JUSTI CE SHAMEEM AKTHER CI VI L MI SCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.3 0 7 2 of 2 0 0 4

¶2

JUDGMENT:

¶3

Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation of Rs.14,040/ - awarded by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional District Judge, Kurnool (‘the Tribunal’ for brevity), vide order, dated 29.06.2004, passed in M.V.O.P.No.671 of 2002, as against the total claim of Rs.1,00,000/ -, the claimant preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (‘the Act’, for brevity) seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶4

2 . Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-claimant, the learned Standing Counsel for New India Assurance Company Limited representing the 2^nd respondent and perused the record.

¶5

3 . The learned counsel for the appellant-claimant would submit that the appellant-claimant suffered one grievious injury and two simple injuries in the subject road accident. The Tribunal awarded a meagre amount of Rs.14,040/ - towards compensation as against a total claim of Rs.1,00,000/ - and ultimately prayed to allow the appeal as prayed for.

¶6

4 . On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for New India Assurance Company Limited representing the 2^nd respondent would submit that the Tribunal had taken all the relevant factors into consideration and awarded just and reasonable amount towards compensation. There are no

¶7

¶8

circumstances to vary the same and ultimately prayed to dismiss the appeal.

¶9

5 . There is no dispute that the appellant-claimant sustained injuries in a road accident that occurred on 20.06.2002 due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the auto bearing registration No.AP-21-V-1976. As per the ocular and documentary evidence placed on record, the appellant-claimant suffered the following injuries.

¶10

1 . Pain w it h t en der n ess w it h sw ellin g at left elbow . 2 . Abr asion on left elbow j oin t 5 cm . in diam et er .

¶11

3 . Abr asion on r igh t an k le 3 cm . in diam et er , r ed in colou r .

¶12

Injury No.2, i.e., Abrasion on left elbow joint 5cm. in diameter, is grievious in nature. The other two injuries are simple in nature. The Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.6,000/ - for one grievious injury, Rs.2,000/ - each for two simple injuries, Rs.4,040/ - towards medical expenses. However, the Tribunal has not granted any compensation under the heads pain and suffering. As per the evidence on record, the appellant-claimant was 17 years old as on the date of accident and was an athlete. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to award an amount of Rs.10,000/ - for one grievious injury, Rs.10,000/ - for two simple injuries (Rs.5,000/ - each) and Rs.5,000/ - towards pain and suffering. The Tribunal rightly awarded an amount of Rs.4,040/ - towards medical expenses which appears to be just and reasonable and there is nothing to vary the same. Thus, the appellant-claimant is entitled for a

¶13

¶14

total compensation of Rs.29,040/ - (Rupees twenty nine thousand and fourty only) (Rs.10,000 + Rs.10,000/ - + Rs.5,000/ - + Rs.4,040/ -). The Tribunal awarded interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation, which appears to be just and reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶15

6 . Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part modifying the order, dated 29.06.2004, passed by the Tribunal, enhancing the compensation from Rs.14,040/ - to Rs.29,040/ - with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. On deposit of the compensation, the appellantclaimant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount and interest. The other terms of the Order under challenge remain unaltered.

¶16

Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

¶17

______________________ Dr . SHAMEEM AKTHER, J

¶18

04^th June, 2018 Bvv

Boya Mallikarjuna v. M. Daurya Naik and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Boya Mallikarjuna v. M. Daurya Naik and Another

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

Mohammed Baba Vs the State of Telangana

Sardhana Rajeeru Vs State of Telangana

Gujjula.Venkata Ramana Reddy Vs the State of A.P.

Boggarapu Lakshmi Kumari Vs R.Venkata Ramana

Venna Aruna and 4 Others Vs P. Srinivas and Another

Kathi David Raju and Another Vs the State of a.P., Rep. by P.P. and 2 Others