Partly allowed

Syed Muqtadeer Ahmed v. N.Siddappa and Another

Telangana HC5 Sept 2023MACMA/2626/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal partly. It set aside the Tribunal's finding that the registered vehicle was not involved, holding the registration number was decisive despite manufacturer discrepancies. The Court awarded ₹1,40,000, including future medical expenses, loss of earnings, pain and suffering, and attendant charges.

What did the court decide?

Claimant awarded Rs. 1,40,000 including future medicals, loss of earnings, and pain and suffering with interest at 7.5% per annum.

Syed Muqtadeer Ahmed Vs N.Siddappa and Another — Specific Performance | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³²¹⁶ ]

¶2

]N THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.LAXMAN

¶6

MOTOR ACCID ENT C IVIL MISCELLANEOU S APPEA L NO: 2626 OF 20oz

¶7

. Appeal filed Under Section i73 of Motor Vehicres Act against the order and decree dated.22t08t2007 made in o.p.No.1528 of 2005 on fiie file or tne Court oi the chairman Motor Accident claims Tribunal-cum- ll Aooitional Cni"i irig., city' Civil Court, Hyderabad.

¶8

Between:

¶9

9y.qd .lYlqqtqOeer^{Ahmed, S/o Syed Maqsood} Engineering Student R/o H.No.11-3-585 New Mailepally, Hyderabad.^'

¶10

.APPELLANT/PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 N$i{Oappg,^{S/o N.Sharnappa, age.major Business} R:/o plot no.205, L.B.Nagar Jeedimetta, Rarigia ReEdy District.

¶13

2 IHgffi [5U,]iJ,'.?.:%BTf Jili#i'ff ;[iB"?I,ff^gf [i,'#,1t',%-'

¶14

R- 1 dismissed for default vide Court Order dated 19-07_2016.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶16

Counsel for the Appellant : SRt. SIVA S LANKA-

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent NO.2 : SMT. SRAVyA KOTTA

¶18

The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

¶19

THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE M.LAXMAN M.A.C.M.A. N 0.2626 of 2OO7

¶20

JUDGMENT:

¶21

The present Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been directed against the order dated 22.08.2OO7 in O.P.No.l528 of 2OO4, on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal -^cum -^{II AdditionalChief Judge,City Civil} Court,^{Hyderabad (for} short "Tribunal") whereby, the claim made by appellant herein for the injuries sustained in the accident was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed at the instance of the claimant.

¶22

The present appeal is hled by the claimant on two grounds. The first ground is that the Tribunal was wrong in holding that the vehicle number, which was charge sheeted, was not involved in the accident and the other vehicle was involved in the accident. The second ground is that the Tribunal has not f-rxed any compensation, however the claimant is entitled to the compensation.

¶23

Learned counsel representing for the lnsurance Company has contended that the Tribunal has rightly found that the vehicle number given in the FIR is not the s€une as that of the description of the vehicle^given in the FIR. According to her, the first information report describes that the vehicle is DCM van whereas, the

¶24

¶25

I P".

¶26

Registration Certihcate of the vehicle shows that it is Swaraj Mazda and therefore, such hndings of the Tribunal require no interference. It is also contended that claimant is not entitled for any compensation.

¶27

Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the material placed on record.

¶28

On perusa-l of the records, it demonstrates that PWI /injured is the best eye witness and his evidence shows that DCM van bearing No. AP-28U-5470 was involved in the accident. The findings of the Tribunal show that accident occurred on account of rash ald negligence driving of the driver of the DCM van.

¶29

Now the question is whether, vehicle bearing No.AP-28U-5470 is the vehicle involved in the accident or any other vehicle with the same number was involved in the accident-.

¶30

7 . There is no dispute that the description to the vehicle is given as DCM van whereas manufacturer name of the vehicle as reflected under Ex.P2/Registration Certificate is Swaraj Mazda. When the vehicle number is specifrcally mentioned, the description of the vehicle or its manufacturer name is insignificant. There is no evidence to show that with the same registration number, any other

¶31

'--

¶32

¶33

vehicle of similar nature as that of Swaraj Mazda was registered with the registration authority. If such evidence is there, the description of the vehicle has some relevance. Registration of the vehicle is not based on the manufacturer narne but it is based on the nature of adoption and usage of the vehicle. Therefore, the Tribunal has misunderstood the evidence on record. There is categorical evidence from the investigating of{icer in the form of charge sheet to show that the vehicle bearing registration No. Ap28U-547O was involved in the accident. Therefore, such findings of the Tribunal require to be set aside. This Court finds that vehicle bearing No.AP-28U-547O is involved in the accident, which was owned by respondent No.l and insured with respondent No.2. Therefore, both respondent Nos.l and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.

¶34

In the present case, evidence of PW2 shows that injured was admitted in the hospital on two occasions and he sustained fracture of left thigh and also abrasion over the back. Further, his evidence also shows that on 14.O4.2OO5, he examined the injured and conducted surgery on 18.04.2005 and he was discharged on 21.O4.2OO4; again the injured was admitted on 04.0g.2005 and surgery was conducted on 05.08.2O05 for remova_l of the implants.

¶35

¶36

¶37

On perusal of Exs.A4^{and A5,} it is^{evident that nearly} Rs.4O,OOO/- was incurred for treatment.^Evidence of^PW2also shows that further surgery^{requiresfor removal of rods. Considering} the same Rs. 1O,OOO/- is^{granted towards} future^{medicalexpenses} and^. Rs.4O,OOO/ls granted towards actual expenditure for treatment. Further, the injured also entitled for^{transportation} charges, extra nourishment and attendant^{charges, underthose} heads altogether Rs.1O,OOO/-^{is granted}

¶38

Further, injured was a B-Tech student, he was not^earning and his notional income is taken at^{Rs.S,OOO/- per month and if six} months period is taken for recovery of his health,^{temporar5rloss of} earning comes to Rs.3O,OO0/-. Injured^suffered fracture of left^leg and left thigh and underwent surgery.^This must^{have caused some} pain and suffering and those injuries have also some impact on amenities and remainder of life.^{Therefore, Rs.25,OOO/-is granted} towards pain and suffering and^{Rs.25,000/- is granted towardsloss} of amenities and loss of remainder of life.

¶39

1 1 . In view of the above facts and circumstances,^the compensation awarded by this Court under^various heads is as follows:

¶40

¶41

Sl.No.	NameofHead	Awardedby thisCourt
I	Temporary lossof earnings	Rs.30,0OO/-
2	Futuremedical expenses	Rs.10,O00/-
	Actualmedical expenses	Rs.4O,OOO/-
4	Transportation, Extra nourishmentand attendantcharges	Rs.1O,O0O/-
5	Painand suffering	Rs.25,O00/-
6	Loss ofamenitiesand lossofremainderof life	Rs.25,000/-
	Total:	Rs.1,aO,0OO/-

¶42

In the result, the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaleous Appeal of the appellant/claimant is partly allowed by awarding a sum of Rs.1,4O,OOO/-. The awarded arnount shall carry interest at 7.5^oh per annum from the date of frling of the O. P. till the date of realization. The claimant shall pay the Court fee on the awarded amount of compensation. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 ate directed to deposit the enhanced amount jointly and severally to the credit of O.P. along with accrued interest within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the claimant/appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount.

¶43

No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if aly, shall stand closed.

¶44

SD/- B CHANDRA PRAKASH, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR.

¶45

//rRUE coPY// I

¶46

To, ",o,iL_rr,"r 1. The Chairman Motor Ag:ident Claims Tribunal-cum- ll Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hydera'Ead (With records, if any)

¶47

1. One CC to SRl. SIVA S LANKA, Advocate tOpUCl 3. One CC to SRI. SRAWA KOTTA, Advocate IOPUC] 4. Two CD Copies g

'" .t

I ,l I

HIGH COURT

DATED:0510912023

51 ATE OF
o
1$L<br>o \t \N ,;,i,
pr1 C,Y
J( OFE

¶54

JUDGMENT

¶55

MACMA.N0.2626 ot 2007

¶56

PARTLY ALLOWING THE^MACMA @4

¶57

¶58

¶59

IN THE HIGH GOURT FOR^{THE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶60

TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶61

PRESENT

¶62

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.LAXMAN

¶63

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANE OUS APPEAL^{NO: 2626 OF2OO7}

¶64

Between:

¶65

Syed Muqtadeer Ahmed, S/o Syed Maqsood^Engineering Student R/o H.No.1 1-3-585 New Mallepally, Hyderabad.

¶66

...APPELLANT/PETITIONER

¶67

AND

¶68

1 N.Siddappa, S/o N.Sharnappa, age major^{Business R/oplot no.205,} L.B.Nagar Jeedimetla, Ranga Reddy District.

¶69

2 Ttre Oriental lnsuran@ Company Limited,,^{Rep..by Regional Manager,} Snehalatha Buildings, Opp BlueMooon^{HotelBegumpet, Hyderabad.}

¶70

R- 1 dismissed for default vide Court Order^{dated19-07-2016.}

¶71

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶72

Appeal filed Under Section 173 of^{Motor Vehichs Act against the Order and} decree dated.2zt\Bt2\O7 madeⁱⁿ O.P.No.152B^{of 2005on the file of the Court of} the Chairman Motor Accident Claims^{Tribunal-cum-ll Additional ChiefJudge'City} Civil Court, Hyderabad.

¶73

ORDER: This appeal coming^{on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of} appeal, the Judgment and Decree^{of the LowerCourt and the material papers in the} Case and upon hearing the arguments^{of SRl. SIVA S LANKA, Advocatefor tlp} Appellant and SRl. SRAVYA KOTTA,^{Advocatefor the RespondentNo.2.}

¶74

I I I I

¶75

This Court doth Order and Decree as follows :

¶76

That the M.A.C.M.A.No.2626 of 2007 fited by the appeltanUctaimant be and hereby is partly allowed by awarding a sum of Rs.1,40,000/_;

¶77

That the awarded amount shall carry interest at 7.5yo per annum from the date of filing of the O.P. till the date of realization;

¶78

That the claimant shall pay the Court . fee on the awarded amount of .^{compensation;}

¶79

That the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 be and hereby are directed to deposit the enhanced amount joinfly and severafly to the credit of o.p. arong with accrued interest within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order;

¶80

That on such deposit, the craimanuappeflant be and hereby is permifted to withdraw the entire amount;

¶81

That save as. aforesaid, the decree of the Lower court shafi stands confirmed in all other respects; and

¶82

That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal.

¶83

SD/- B CHANDRA PRAKASH, ASSISTANT R ISTRAR.

//TRUE COPY//

To,

SECTION OFFICER

The chairman Motor Accident claims Tribunal-cum- ll Additional chief Judge, -^{City CivilCourt, Hyderabad (With records, if any)} 2. Two CD Copies

ADK

HIGH COURT

2 DRAFTS

DATED:05l/0912023

JUDGMENT+DECREE

MACMA.No.2626 ot 2007

¶96

PARTLY ALLOWNG THE MACMA

¶97

@oqli'$ 9r"r ,3^r}

Syed Muqtadeer Ahmed v. N.Siddappa and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Muqtadeer Ahmed v. N.Siddappa 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

Mohd. Sirajuddin, Vs The Central Bank of India

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

Moinuddin Vs Sri Md. Akthar Hussain and Anr.

Dr. C. Yadagiri And 2 Others Vs Venkatram Rami Reddy And 15 Others

Akula Srinivas Rao and 3 Ors. Vs G.Venkateswara Sharma,Warangal

The Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Kurnoo Vs Pasham Jangaiah and 2 Others