Partly allowed

Mailaram Yadaiah v. N.Sudhakar and Anr.

Telangana HC1 Oct 2018MACMA/2894/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The appellant appealed against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's order granting Rs.12,500 compensation. The court held the appellant entitled to enhancement due to insufficient award for injuries and scooter damage. Compensation enhanced to Rs.17,500 with interest.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced from Rs.12,500 to Rs.17,500 with interest at 7.5% per annum on the enhanced amount from the date of petition.

Mailaram Yadaiah Vs N.Sudhakar and Anr. — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTI CE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶2

M.A.C.M.A.No.2 8 9 4 of 2 0 0 5

¶3

JUDGMENT:

¶4

This appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act’), by the appellant-claimant aggrieved by the order dated 19.07.2005 in O.P.No.688 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad (for short ‘the Tribunal’).

¶5

Heard the learned counsel for appellant-claimant and the learned Standing Counsel for 2^nd respondent-Insurance Company and perused the record. The appeal against 1^st respondent was dismissed for default on 05.01.2012.

¶6

Learned counsel for the appellant-claimant would contend that though the appellant suffered injuries on head and legs, and lot of damage was caused to his scooter, the Tribunal granted meagre compensation of Rs.12,500/ - with interest @ 9% per annum and ultimately, prayed to enhance the same.

¶7

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondentInsurance Company would contend that the Tribunal is justified in granting the compensation under different heads. There are no circumstances to enhance the compensation and ultimately, prayed to dismiss the appeal.

¶8

In view of the submissions made by both sides, the point that arises for determination is, whether the appellant is entitled for enhancement of compensation?

¶9

There is no dispute with regard to the injuries suffered by the appellant-claimant in a motor accident that occurred on

¶10

¶11

15.07.2002 due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of auto bearing No.AP11V-4769 while he was riding scooter bearing registration No.ABB 6650. The only dispute is with regard to quantum of compensation.

¶12

As per the oral and documentary evidence, the appellant suffered two lacerated injuries i.e., on head and legs, and scooter was also damaged. The Tribunal granted total compensation of Rs.12,500/ - under different heads. As the accident occurred in the year 2002, the Tribunal ought to have granted some more amount towards compensation for the injuries and the damages caused to the scooter. Hence, the appellant is entitled for a sum of Rs.5,000/ - in addition to the above said compensation. In total, the appellant-claimant is entitled for a compensation of Rs.17,500/ - (Rs.12,500/ - + Rs.5,000/ -) with interest @ 7.5% per annum on the enhanced compensation from the date of petition till the date of deposit.

¶13

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed modifying the order, dated 19.07.2005, passed by the Tribunal in O.P.No.688 of 2002 enhancing the compensation from Rs.12,500/ - to Rs.17,500/ - with interest @ 7.5% per annum on the enhanced compensation from the date of petition till the date of deposit. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the same along with the interest accrued thereon.

¶14

The Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. No costs.

¶15

______________________ Dr . SHAMEEM AKTHER, J

¶16

Date: 01.10.2018 ssp

¶17

Mailaram Yadaiah v. N.Sudhakar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mailaram Yadaiah v. N.Sudhakar and Anr.

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

United India Insurance Company Limited, Kadapa. Vs Bellam Manikyamma and 4 Others

The New India Assurance Company Liimited Vs Abdl Rajak and 5 Others

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Vs Smt.K. Anuradha Alias Anjani and 2 Others

M/s.Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs P.Jangaiah

Mohd. Abdul Bari and 2 Ors. Vs the Union of India

Jumbarthi Narsamma Vs M. Venugopala Rao and 2 Others