Allowed

G.Sowndarya v. v.Venkateshwar Rao

Telangana HC2 Mar 2023MACMA/1413/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, the High Court allowed the appeal against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's order. The Court enhanced the compensation awarded to the appellant from Rs.52,000 to Rs.1,84,000, considering details of injuries, medical expenses, loss of earnings, and other damages.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation awarded from Rs.52,000 to Rs.1,84,000 with interest at 7.5% p.a.; order to insurance company to deposit amount within eight weeks.

G.Sowndarya Vs v.Venkateshwar Rao — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³²³⁰ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶6

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1413 OF 2009

¶7

Appeal Under Section 173 of lvlotor Vehicles Act against the order and decree in M.V.O.P. No.1151 of 2000 dated^2Ol1Ol20O4 on the file of the Court of the Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - cum -^lV Additional^District Judge, (FTC), Nalgonda.

¶8

Between:

¶9

G. Sowndarya, W/o Hanumantha Rao, aged: 40^years, Occ:^{Tailoring Rl/o} H.No.4-'l 1-545 Near lTl, D.V.K.Road, Nalgonda Town.

¶10

.PETITION ER/APPELLANT

¶11

AND

¶12

V. Venkateshwar Rao, S/o Rama Rao, Aged Major, Occ:^Employee Ownerof Scooter No.AP 24 C 8304 R/o H.no.4-10-393^D.V.K.Road Abbasla^Colony, Nalgonda Town and District.

¶13

The United lndia lnsurance Company Limited,^rep. by^{its Branch Manager,} Branch Office, 18-121-GlA, Ashoknagar,^tvliryalguda town^{Nalgonda District.}

¶14

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶15

Counsel forthe Appellant: SRI KIRAN PALAKURTHI

¶16

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: M/s.^P. SATYA MANJULA

¶17

The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

¶18

HO\i'Itt It SM'I'. JUSTICE LALITIIA K,\ir NI,]GAN'I'I

¶19

M.A.C.M.A. No.1413 of 20(19

¶20

JUDGMIIN'I':

¶21

'l his a'r1: :r I is prcf-errecl by the claimar.rl/ap1-r( ll rnt aggr.ieved by the^jr-rdenrent rnd decree dated 20. 10.2004 passed trv thc C'hairntar-r, Motor A;cide tts Clair.r-rs^'fribunal (IV Ad<lition:l District .luclge) (F.T.C'.) rrt lri Igonda (for slrort, 'the Tribunal') ir O.t).No.ll5l of 2000, ',r,'- erct y the^-fribunal has granted onli al- amoullt of Rs.52,000/- li r the injurics sustained by htr in .-l rnotor accident against thr: clir rlre<l arnoLurt ol'Rs.1,00,000/-.

¶22

'l he b:' t l- facts o1- the case are that on l{1. - 3.2000 at abor,rt I2.00 nc,Jr. rr lrile the clairnant \vas proce(-( ll g lorvards her rclativc's hor.r,e by rvalk and on the way rvhen r re rcachecl ncar cross roarl o1 u4 -rnugode and on Deverkonda roac , ,he driver ol- the scooter drov t: his scooter in a rash and negligent nlan)ter u,ith high speed an<l d:rs tcd the clair-nant from her back, as ir result of rvl-rich, tl-re clairnunr. : Lr:;tained fracture to the rniddle en-. of the right leg bones. sc-atr: r ir rjuries to shoulder and right fbrea-- r and aparl fiom otl.rer irrjrrrir::; all over the body. Lnmediately. ll.e ,:laimant was shified tcr Sri I larn Orlhopaedic Hospital and later : l,e rvas shifiecl to Grcen [-ar.rds I lospital. Nalgonda. She incLrrred nt :rlica I expenditure

¶23

¶24

¶25

and underwent operations.

¶26

The 1't respondent was set ex parte before the Tribunal. The 2"d respondent-Insurance Company filed counter-affidavit before the Tribunal denying tl.re date, place and time of tl.re accident and involvement of the vehicle. The nature of the injuries are also denied.

¶27

On behalf of the claimant, PWs.l and 2 were examined and got marked Exs.A. 1 to A.14. On behalf of the Insurance Company, none was examined and Ex.B.l was marked.

¶28

The Tribunal on analyzing the evidence held that the accident was on account of the negligent driving on the part of the driver of the scooter as such awarded an amount of Rs.52,000/- with interest at 9o/o per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. 6. Sri Kiran Palakurthy, learned counsel for tl.re appellantclaimant, submits that though the clairnant has subrlitted the medical bills to show that she has sustained injuries in the accident and spent amounts for the treatment, the Tribunal has granted only an amount of Rs.52,000/-.

¶29

Smt. P.Satya Manjula, learned Counsel for the Insurance

¶30

¶31

compan r', s ul ,nrits that basi,g on trre evidcLrcc a r.,Lirable .n record the T'ibtur.r has reasonably granted the corr pr:ns atiorr. It is subrnitterl t.ta the clairnant l-ras failed to urakc ( )ut any grouncls seeking e nhrr u :ement of the cornpensation.

¶32

8 Heard ie arued counsel on either side a'd pe t.se<l tl'r e rnaterial on record

¶33

The c'.,rr ence of PW.2/Doctor shows that lre' hiis treated the claimant fbr s rstaining liactures to both bores , riglrt teg and l.re has clo'rc op c:r rtion a,d insertecl plate and screrv - n right tibia on 11.08.2000.^"hc claim.nt was i,patient for^.l dtys. He further

¶34

deposecl tlrar t pproximate medicar bills which rv:r.: ir;suecl by trre hospital a-Lc'l c,: p,:nses ol Rs. r 9,000/- were incurrer r rry trre crairnant. Even as :rer I tc, <lischarge summary, the claimit.t. has sustained fiacture to lr.r rcth bo,es of right leg, abrasion o.n.r.r. :rbow right and right scapLrlar rr shoulder and filed several mcclic i. I L ills to show that there:L ltcr Lnother operation rvas done. z\s th,:-r: u as difficulty in walkingr f<r: tL e injuries sustained by the claime.r.,t, rhe Tribunar I.ras granterl ar tr.iount o1 Rs.20,000/- foi the fractrrrr: olboth bones of right lei1.^a cr:ording to this Court, the said a*t,t r't gra,ted for

¶35

¶36

¶37

the fractures is not reasonable compensation. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant Rs.80,000/- for the two fractures. The claimant has sustained two simple injures and the Tribunal has not granted any amount. Hence, the claimant is entitled to an amount of Rs.10,000/for the two simple injuries. For the rnedical expenses, the Tribunal has granted to an amount of Rs.25,000/-. As the claimant underwent surgery, this Court is inclined to grant an amount of Rs.30,000/-. According to the petitioner, she was working and earning an amount of Rs.3,000/- per month. For the loss of earnings for three months, the claimant is entitle to an amount of Rs.9,000/-. Apart liom that the under the other heads ie., pain and suffering, medical expcnses, attendant, extra nourishment and transportation, the Tribunal has granted rneager amounts. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant an amount of Rs.15,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.10,0001 towards attendant charges, Rs. 10,000/- towards extra nourishment and Rs. I 0,000/- towards transport.

¶38

Leamed counsel for the appellant/clairnant has relied on the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in V.Mekala v

¶39

¶40

t I

¶41

M.NI:rlar lri a nrl anothcrr, u,herein the Aper -^)ur_! taking ln to

¶42

consirlcrirLicrr tlre date of the accider.rt and till ll're irppt:al reached to the Ancx C'or. rt has au,arclcd a surn ol Rs.25,000' tou,ards cost of litigation. He r cc, an alrount of Rs.10.000/- rs iLw rr,leci towards cost of litigation

¶43

I L IIerrcc, rhis Court is inclined to grant cornp:r'sation rrnder the follou'ing lrr:a, ls

¶44

[)articr-rlars		l.TloL byt	lntaurarded hisCourt
Grievolr:;irjrri,:s-2^(Rs.40,000/-each)		lls	80,000/-
Simplcirrjur.r's.)(Rs.5.000/-each)			r0,000/-
Mcdical^(ixlelscs			30,000/-
Lossol'carrrirgs(Its.3,0(X)p.rn.x3)			9,000/-
Pair-r arrclsufIl^'ring			r5.000/-
Trans1'lolr		I.;	r0,000/-
AttenclarLchirgcs			r0,000/-
Extrano -rrir';lrn:r'rt		I	10.000/-
Litigatio'rcb:r'gcs		t	10,000/-
	Totnl	Rr,	I.'84,000/-

¶45

I n th,: r'e sult, thc appeal is allrwed ell lauc irlg thc

¶46

compensirl iolr lr-rollnt arvalcled by the Tribunal li rrn R s.52,000/- to 1 2014 (5)Ar.. 42 lS .l

¶47

¶48

Rs.1,84,000/- (Rupees one lakh eighty four thousand only) AS hereunder:

¶49

(a) The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 7 .5oh p.a. from the date petition till the date of realization.

¶50

(b) The claimant shall pay the court fee on the enl-ranced amount of compensation.

¶51

(b) The Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

¶52

¶53

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶54

SO/. K. VENKATAH ASSISTANT^REGIS/RAR //TRUE coPY// y/

¶55

SECTION^OFFICER

¶56

To, 1 The chairperson,^MACT -^cum -^{lV Additional District Judge(FTC) Nalgonda} (with records)

¶57

1. bnl cCio Sht^{KIRAN PALAKURTHI,Advocate [oPUC]} 3. One CC to M/s.^{P. SATYA MANJULA,Advocate IOPUUI} 4. Two CD CoPies BN

HIGH COL' I'T

DATED 102:.lJ:r|2023

JUDGMEN T

MACMA.l,,l <r.'l 413 of 2009

¶65

/:'
ira iill 1{ll
a !t

¶66

ALLOWII.IC THE MACMA. WITHOU'I'^I )OSTS

bf^4

[³²³⁰ ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶71

THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶72

PRESENT

¶73

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶74

MOTOR ACC IDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1413 OF 2009

¶75

Between:

¶76

G. Sowndarya, Wo Hanumantha Rao, aged: 40^years, Occ: Tailoring^Rl/o H.No.4-11-545 Near lTl, D.V.K.Road, Nalgonda^Town.

¶77

...PETITIONER/APPELLANT

¶78

AND

¶79

1 . V. Venkateshwar Rao, S/o Rama Rao, Aged Major, Occ:^{Employee Owner} of Scooter No.AP 24 C 8304 R/o H.no.4-10-393^D.V.K.Road Abbasla^Colony, Nalgonda Town and District.

¶80

The United lndia lnsurance Company^{Limited, rep. by its Branchlvlanager,} Branch Office, 18-121-61A, Ashoknagar, Miryalguda^{town Nalgonda District.}

¶81

...RESPON DENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶82

Appeal Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the order^and decree in M.V.O.P. No.'1 151 of 2000 daled^2011012O04 on^{the file of the Court of} the Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - cum -^{lV AdditionalDistrict} Judge, (FTC), Nalgonda.

¶83

This appeal coming on for hearing and upon^{perusing the groundsof} appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and^{the material papers in} the case and upon hearing the arguments of SRI^{KIRANPALAKURTHI,} Advocate for the Appellant and of M/s. P. SATYA MANJULA,^{Advocatefor the} Respondent No.2 and of Advocate for the Respondent^{No.1 not appeared either} in person or by Advocate.

¶84

This Court Doth Order and Decree as^Follows

¶85

That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal^{be andhereby is allowed} enhancing the compensation amount awarded^by the^{Tribunal fromRs.} 52,000/- to Rs. 1,84,000/-^(Rupees One^Lakh Eighty^{FourThousand Only) as} here under:

¶86

(a) That the enhanced amount shall carry interest al7 .5o/o^p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.

¶87

(b) T-at thr claimants shalr pay the court fee on the enlri:rrcerr amount of Comtr(rr Sa tion

¶88

(c) That tlr( l.surance company sha deposit the amourt witin a period of erglht v,r ef,s from the date of receipt of a copy of the JLrCgnrent

¶89

(d) That :r sLch deposit, the claimant rs entilled t,r withr rzrw tfre entire anloL r t ,vi hout furnishing the security.

¶90

2 That ;ave z s irforesaid, the decree of the Lower crourt sl3 | stands confirmed in all :,thr:r espects; and

¶91

That there I e no order as to costs in this appeal.

¶92

I;D/,, K. VENKAIAH ASS Si''ANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/i

¶93

siEC flON &rrce*

¶94

To, 1 . The C lral'pt rs tn MACT - cum - lV Additional Districr Jr rlre (l:TC) Nalgonda (with rr:cc rC ;)

¶95

2 Two CD^()r ,ies

I I

t /

HlcH coLil lT

DATED:021):J12023

DECREE

MACMA.lN,r.1 413 of 2009

¶104

ALLOWIIN.i THE MACMA. WITHOUT COSTS

¶105

@.q'4 &, \ \u\ae

G.Sowndarya v. v.Venkateshwar Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Sowndarya v. v.Venkateshwar Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

United India Insurance Company Limited Vs Tangutoori Narender and Anr.

Mohd. Afsar Hussain Vs B. Dayananad and Another

Podili Saidulu Vs Gopagani Chandrasekhar and Anr.

Kurma Saya Gonda, Tadkole [v], Nizamabad Dist., and 5 Otrs. Vs Sri Shanker, and Anr.

Smt. a. Paravathi Vs M/S Ravi Cranes, and Another

Mohd Afzal Vs M/S.P.S.C.Bose Automobiles and Anr.