Partly allowed

Moinuddin v. Sri Md. Akthar Hussain and Anr.

Telangana HC4 Sept 2023MACMA/2482/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal where the appellant challenged the low compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The High Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.87,000/- covering injury, loss of earnings, medical, and attendant charges, and ordered respondents to deposit the amount with interest.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs.87,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum; order to deposit within two months.

Moinuddin Vs Sri Md. Akthar Hussain and Anr. — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³²¹⁶ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.LAXMAN

¶6

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL M ISCELLNEOUS APPEAL NO: 2482 OF 2007

¶7

. Appeal filed Under sectron i 73 of ft/otor Vehicles Act against the order and decreeinM.Vo.P.No.25't of 2003datedog.o4.2o07onthefiliof thecourtotttre Chairman lvlotor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- District Judge, Nizamabad.

¶8

Between:

¶9

Moinuddin, S/o Gudusha R/o. Kotagiri Village and Mandal Nizamabad District

¶10

...Appella nUPetitio n e r

¶11

AND

¶12

Sri Md Akthar Hussain, S/o.Md. Khajamiya, Owner of Auto bearing No.AP25IU-3696, R/o.H.No.B-8, Rudrur Village, Varni Mandal, Nizamabad District

¶13

The National lnsurance Company Limited, rep., by its Branch Manager, Branch Office Jawahar Road, Nizamabad

¶14

...Respondents

¶15

Counsel for the Appellant : Sri V TULASI REDDY Counsel for the Respondents : Sri J SUNIL KUMAR

¶16

The Court delivered the following : JUDGMENT

¶17

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. LAXMAN

¶18

MOTOR ACCIDENT CTVTL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.2482 OF 2OO7

¶19

JUDGMENT:

¶20

1 The present Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the appellant-claimant challenging the order and decree, dated 09.04.2007 in M.V.O.p.No.2S1 of 2003 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (District Judge) at Nizamabad, (hereinafter referred to as^.Tribunal,).

¶21

The grievance of the claimant - injured is that the Tribunal has grahted meager compensation ignoring the nature of injuries particularly comminuted fracture of lower end ol left lcg femur and there were laceration and abrasion injuries. Therefore, he claimed for more compensation.

¶22

Learned counsel representing Insurance Companl, has opposed the enhancement. According to him, the Tribunal has rightly granted compensation basing on the evidence avairable on record. According to him, there is no evidence to sholv that thc ir-rjuries sustained by the injured were not completely healed anci there u,as disability on account of any such injuries. Thc amounts granted by the Tribunal was justilied b,y taking into consideration the year of accident and further submitted th:rt there is no requirement of enhance of compensation.

I ! I

I t III

i I

4. Heard both^sides'

5.TheevidenceofPW.2-DoctorandDx'A3injurycertificate clearly shows^{that the injured sufferedcomminuted fracture of} lower end of^{left femur and he also sufferedlacerationover right} knee and^{foreheadand there also abrasion over left elbow' The} injured^{was admitted in hospital on 23'11'2OO2 and underwent} surgery on^{11.03.2002and discharged on 05'12'2OO2'Ex'A6 X-} ray film also^{supports the comminuted fracture of lou'er end of left} femur.TheTribunalhasacceptedalltheaboveinjuries.The Tribunal has^{granted Rs'43,O00/- on the injurv basisFor} grievous lnJurles'^{Rs.25,000/- is granted; for laceratronrn3ury} was grantcd^{for abrasrve} Rs.5,0O0/-^{granted and Rs'2,000/-} injuries. The^{aPProach ofthe} Tribunal^grantingsuch compensation^{on injur5r basis is not based on the principlesof} assessment^{of compensation'This Court feels that such amount} awarded is^{treated under pain and suffering instead ofthe} The Tribunal^{has granted} compensation^{on the injurybasis'} Rs.9,OO0/- towards^{loss of earnings' The income u'as fixed} Rs.3,OO0/-^{and for threemonths it has been taken ln the present} case, the injured^{was agriculturist'The Tribunalhas taken the} profession of the injured^{as HotelServer bv relvingupon Ex'A2'} Considering the^{nature of professionarld injuriessustainedby}

¶31

¶32

the injured, this Court feels that the temporary loss of earnings should be one year not three months. The same monthly income is accepted for 12 months- Therefore, this Court is inclined to grant a sum of Rs.36,00O/ - (Rs.3,OOO x 12) touards loss o1t temporary earnings, uhich includes amounts alreadg granted. bA the Tribunal i.e., Rs.9,OOO.

¶33

¶34

The Tribunal has not granted any expenditure towards medical expenses, since there is no evidence on record. The Tribunal has aiso not granted compensation towards transportation charges, extrzr nourishment and attendant charges. As per the evidence, injured rvas under treatment for nearly 12 days in the hospital. During this period, he must have incurred expenditure in the form o[ transportation charges, extra nourishment and attendant charges. Therefore, this Court is inclined to grant a sum of Rs.|),OOO/ - towards transportation charges, extra nourishment and attendant charges. The Tribunal has not gran ted any compensation torvards future medical expenses. The evidence on record shorvs that there is fracture of left femur lower end and there is sr-rrgery. Fixation of screws and nails with plates to fix the lracture u,as done. Therefore, he requires further surgery for removal of such plates. Therefore, this Court is inclined to grant a sum ol Rs.20,0OO/ - toward.s

, t

: I I I

I I I

fufure^{medical expenses. The Tribunal has not granted any} compensation towards loss^{of amenities and impactof such injury} on the residual life of the injured.^{This Court is inclined to grant} a sum of Rs.3O,OOO/ - toutards^{loss of amenities.'}

¶40

In the result, the Motor Accide nt Civil^{MiscellaneousAppeal} is partly allowed by granting corrpcnsation^{of Rs.87,OOO/-.The} compensation amount shall^{carry interestat 7 .5 o/o per annum} from the date of liling of the^{O.P. tilltl.re date of realization'} Respondent Nos. 1 and 2^{are jointl-r'aud severallyliable to deposit} the enhanced amount to the credit^{of O.P. along with accmed} interest within a^{period of t.'n'o months from the dateof receipt of a} copy of this order. On^{such deposit, thc appe llant is permittedto} withdraw the entire amount^{in the proportions, as llxed by the} Tribunal. There shall be no^{order ars to costs. Miscellaneous}

¶41

petitions pending, if any, shall^{stand closed}

¶42

SD/.K.AMMAJI ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR

,,TRUE^COPYII

SECTION^OFFICER

To, I 2. 3. ?tg'l'.,Hli:'HT#:^i[=^jt*il'- 4 Two CD^CoPies SP

District^Judge'

HIGH COURT

DATED:041O912023

JUDGMENT

.6i siAl-4'
J'
C)
).) 1 g ItAs 2[2[ .<br>*
, c t: -,,f ct'

¶52

MACMA.N o.2482 oI 2001

¶53

PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA

¶54

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶55

MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶56

PRESENT

¶57

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.LAXMAN

¶58

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLNEOUS APPEAL NO: 2482 OF 2007

¶59

Between:

¶60

Moinuddin, S/o. Gudusha R/o. Kotagiri Village and Mandal Nizamabad District.

¶61

...AppellanUPetitioner

¶62

AND

¶63

Sri Md. Akthar Hussain, S/o.Md. Khajamiya, Owner of Auto bearing No AP25IU-3696, R/o.H.No.B{, Rudrur Village, Varni Mandal, Nizamabad District

¶64

The National lnsurance Company Limited, rep., by its Branch^Manager, Branch Office Jawaha'r Road, Nizamabad

¶65

...Respondents

¶66

Appeal filed Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the^Orderand decree in M.V.O.P No.251 of 2003 dated 09.04.2007 on the file of the^{Court of the} Chairman Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- District Judge, Nizamabad.

¶67

ORDER: This appeal coming on for hearing and upon^perusing the^{grounds of} appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and the^{materialpapersin} the Case and upon hearing the arguments of Sri V. TULASI REDDY,^Advocatefor the Appellant and of SRI.J SUNIL KUMAR, Advocate for the Respondent

¶68

This Court doth order and Decree as follows

¶69

That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and^{herebyis Partly} Allowed,

¶70

That the Compensation amount awarded of Rs.87,000/-;

¶71

That the Compensation amounl shall carry interest at^{7.5 o/o pannumfrom} the date of filing of the O.P till the date of realization;

¶72

Thal the Respondent No.'l & 2 are^jointly and severally liable^{to deposit the} enhanced amount to the credit of O.P along with accrued^{interestwithina} period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order.

¶73

¶74

tt ,;ffi:iffi:" ;

¶75

¶76

//TRUE COPYII o*,.rorioJAillfll#

¶77

fo, s ECT,ON OFF,CER li6rr.xnHS!;4"",0",, Claims Trjbunal_cumDistrict Judge,

HIGH COURT

DATED:0410912023

DECREE

MACMA.N o.2482 of 2007

¶82

PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA

¶83

)

Moinuddin v. Sri Md. Akthar Hussain and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Moinuddin v. Sri Md. Akthar Hussain 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

K.Peda Gangannaa and Anr. Vs Kasarapu Rajanna and 2 Ors.

A.P.State Essential Commodities Corpnltd Vs Syndicate Bank Bm and 2

The Ap State Essestial Commodities Corpt. Ltd., Vs Syndicate Bank

Mohan TRading Company Vs Sri Kanyaka Financiers

Nalla Ailaiah and 5 Ors. Vs the Ap State Road Transport Corporation and Anr.

Mohd. Sirajuddin, Vs The Central Bank of India