Dismissed

K.R. Koteswara Rao v. M/S Abdul Khader Distributors and Another

Telangana HC14 Jun 2018MACMA/3121/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by a motor accident claimant seeking enhancement of compensation. Finding that the Tribunal properly calculated and awarded adequate compensation considering evidence and injuries, the appeal was held devoid of merit.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed. No order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions were closed.

K.R. Koteswara Rao Vs M/S Abdul Khader Distributors… — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶2

M.A.C.M.A.No.3121 OF 2005

¶3

JUDGMENT :

¶4

This appeal is filed by the appellant-claimant under Section 173 of the M.V. Act, aggrieved by the judgment, dated 19.11.2004, in M.V.O.P.No.65 of 2001, passed by the Special Judge for the trial of offences under the SCs & STs (PoA) Act-cum-VI Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cumXX Addl. Chief Judge, Secunderabad, for enhancement of compensation.

¶5

No representation for both sides. This matter underwent several adjournments. On earlier occasions, there was no representation for both sides. Despite, listing the matter today under the caption ‘for dismissal’, there is no representation for both sides. Since this appeal is of the year 2005, it can be disposed of on merits.

¶6

The appellant contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is totally disproportionate to the claim made by the appellant. The Tribunal failed to take the principles governing the calculation and awarded compensation. The Tribunal failed to see the permanent disability suffered by the appellant and failed to grant adequate compensation for the fractures and other injuries. Though, the appellant claimed compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-, the Tribunal granted only Rs.1,97,750/and ultimately, prayed to enhance the compensation.

¶7

The Tribunal, vide impugned judgment, dated 19.11.2004, was pleased to award compensation of Rs.1,97,750/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. While dealing with the

¶8

¶9

subject matter of the impugned O.P., the Tribunal had elaborately discussed the evidence of all witnesses and material documents placed and ultimately granted the above mentioned compensation. The Tribunal had specified different heads under which, the appellant is entitled for compensation, properly calculated and awarded compensation. Therefore, there is nothing to take a different view. The appeal is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed.

¶10

Accordingly, the Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this appeal shall stand closed.

¶11

__________________________
DR.SHAMEEM AKTHER, J
DATED: 14-06-2018
Hsd

K.R. Koteswara Rao v. M/S Abdul Khader Distributors and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.R. Koteswara Rao v. M/S Abdul Khader Distributors 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

Divisional Manager Vs G. Krishnaiah Naidu

Pabba Laxman Vs B.Lingaiah

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vijayawada. Vs Guguloth Vijaya , Rama and 2 Others

The New India Assurance Company Limited, Hyderabad. Vs D.R. Sarma and 5 Others

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Yanamadhala Subbayamma

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Rep. by Its Dm, , and Another Vs N. Narayana Reddy and Another