Partly allowed

Smt. Gudala Balamani , G.Shobha v. the a.P.S.R.T.C., and Another

Telangana HC6 Sept 2023MACMA/3683/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, the High Court of Telangana enhanced the compensation awarded to the petitioner, a labourer injured in a road accident involving an APSRTC bus. The court increased the award from Rs. 1,27,000 to Rs. 1,55,500 by adding amounts for loss of earnings, attendant charges, and injuries.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced from Rs. 1,27,000 to Rs. 1,55,500 with interest at 7.5% per annum.

Smt. Gudala Balamani , G.Shobha Vs the a.P.S.R.T.C… — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

{^3304I

¶2

IN THE HIGH^{COURT FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

WEDNESDAY,^{THE SIXTH DAYOF SEPTEMBER} -'--rwlo trouSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICE NAMAVARAPURAJESHWAR RAO} MOTO^{R ACCIDETCI} VlL MISC LLANEO^{US APPEAL NO:3683} F 2012 Appeal filed^{Under Sec{ion 173 of Motor VehiclesAct againstthe Orderand} decree in^{o.P.No.779ot z"o?r-o'teafin7nolz.on.the file of the Court of the} -cr"*I-i-"orn"t-"r. Xl Additional chief Judge, (Fast chairman^{MotorAccident} iack Court)^{City Civil Court,Hyderabad.}

¶6

Between:

¶7

Smt. Gudala^{balamani, G Shobha'WlgieYA.algGanesh' Occ Labourer' R/o} ill'N; 1ii6^{-FT;;rinig"'vill6;?nduanoat' Ransa Reddv District'}

¶8

...APPELLANTIPETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

1 The A.P.S.R.T.C,^{Rep. by its Managing Director'RTC X Roads'} Musheerabad,^HYderabad'

¶11

The Depot^{Manager, A'P'S R'T C MidhaniBus Depot' Kanchanbagh'} Hyderabad.

¶12

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶13

Counsel^{for the Appellant: SRI' B VENKAT REDDY}

¶14

Counsel^{for the Respondents: SRI' C SUNILKUMAR REDDY} (sc FOR APSRTC)

¶15

The Court^{delivered the following: JUDGMENT}

¶16

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO M.A.C.M.A.No .3683 oF 2012

¶17

JUDGMENT:

¶18

Aggrieved by the order and decree dated l9.OZ.2Ol2 passed in O.P.No.779 of 2Otl by the XI Additional Chief Judge (Fast Track Court), City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short 'the Court below"), the appellant/petitioner preferred the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶19

For convenience, the parties hereinafter will be referred to as they are arrayed before the Court below.

¶20

Brief facts of the case are that on Ol.O2.2Ol1 at about 16O0 hours, the petitioner was proceeding on a motorcycle bearing No.AP-28-K-7IOO as a pillion rider from Nadergul,s side towards Ragannaguda,s side along with her husband, who was riding the motorcycle. At that time, one RTC Bus bearing No.AP- 1O-2-3986, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, went to the wrong side of the road and dashed against the motorcycle, as a result of which, the petitioner and her husband felt down, and both of them sustained injuries. After the accident, the petitioner was

¶21

2 RRN, J M-A.C.M.A. No.368l of^20'12

¶22

shifted to Kamineni Hospital for treatment.^{The petitioner} sustained a head injury, anterior interhemispheric^acute haemorrhage and right clavicle fracture.^{Due to the said} injuries, the petitioner suffered from^{head ache, giddiness and} memory loss. The Police Meerpet^{registered acase in} Cr.No.61 of 2Oll for the offences^{punishableunderSections} 338 IPC against the driver of the^{offending vehicle. The} accident occurred due to the rash^{and negligentdriving of} the bus driver. As of the date^{of theaccident,} the petitioner was earning^{Rs.4,500/-permonth} by working as a labourer. Therefore, the^petitioner hled the O.P. seeking compensation^{ofRs.3,O0,0OO/-.}

¶23

The respondents filed a^{counter denying the} allegations made in the^{claim petition.}

¶24

To prove the petitioner's case,^{PWs. 1 to 3were} examined and marked Exs.Al^{to A11 and Ex.X-I. No oral} evidence was adduced on behalf^{of the respondents, but} Ex.Bl-copy of the insurance^{policy wasmarked.}

¶25

After considering the oral and^{documentar5revidence} available on record, the court^{below has awarded an amount}

¶26

¶27

RRN,J M.A.C.M.A. No.1683 of 2012

¶28

of Rs. l,27,OOO/- rvith interest @7^o/o per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit to be paid by the respondents. Challenging the said award, the petitioner has filed the present appeal seeking enhancement.

¶29

Heard both sides. Perused the record

¶30

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the Court below ought to have considered the injuries sustained by the petitioner. The court below has not awarded just compensation under other heads, therefore, the amount awarded by the court below is very meager and unjustifiable.

¶31

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has contended that the Court below, after considering the nature of injuries sustained by the petitioner and based on the evidence, has rightly awarded compensation and the same needs no interference by this Court.

¶32

The finding of the Court below with regard to the manner in which the accident took place has become final, as the respondents do not challenge the same.

¶33

¶34

RRN,J M.A.C.M.A.No.3683^{of 2012}

¶35

1 I . Insofar as the quantum of^{compensationis}

¶36

concerned, the petitioner stated^{that she was aged 4O years} and earning Rs.4,5OO/- per month^{by working as a labourer} and for the injuries sustained by^{her, she took treatment for} ten months. But,^{the Courtbelowawarded only an amountof} Rs.5,O0O/- towards loss^{of earnings, which could be more} manageable. In view of the^{injuries sustainedby the} petitioner, she must have taken^{bed rest for at least three} months. Therefore, by fixing^{the petitioner'smonthly income} at Rs.4,5OO/-, this Court^{is inclinedto awardan amountof} Rs. 13,5OO/- towards loss^{of earnings.The Court below} rightly awarded an^{amount ofRs.2,OOO/- towards} transportation to the hospital,^{whichneeds no interference'} The Court below rightly^{grantedan amount of Rs.60,OOO/-} towards extra nourishment^{and medical expenses, which} needs no interference.^{The petitionerclairnedRs.7,OOO/-} towards attendant charges.^{The court belowdid not grant} any amount on this head.^{Due to the injurieswithout} attendant he cannot maintain.^{As the petitioner sustained} above inj uries and^{took bed rest for three months,this Court} is inclined to award an^{amount of Rs.5,000/-towards}

¶37

5 RRN,J M.a.C.M.A. No.l68l of 2012

¶38

) t

¶39

¶40

attendant charges. The court below has rightly awarded an amount of Rs.25,OOO/- towards pain and suffering, which needs no interference. The petitioner stated tl.at she had suffered two grievous injuries and other simple injuries. The court below awarded an amount of Rs.35,0OO/- towards grievous and simple injuries, which is very meager. This Court is inclined to award an amount of Rs.SO,OOO/- towards two grievous and other simple injuries sustained by the petitioner. In all, the petitioner is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,55,500/-.

¶41

The Court below has rightly awarded the rate of interest at 7%o per annum, which needs no interference by this Court. However, the petitioner is entitled to the interest @^{7 .5o/o per annumon the enhanced} compensation amount.

¶42

In the result, the M.A.C.M.A is allowed in part and the compensation amount awarded by the court below is enhanced from Rs. l,27,OOO/- to Rs. 1,55,5OO/- (Rupees one lakh fifty live thousand five hundred only) with interest @ 7.5 %o p.a. on the enhanced compensation amount from the date of petition till the date of realization. The respondents

¶43

RRN,J M.A.C.M.A. No.368l of²⁰¹²

¶44

¶45

are directed to deposit^{the said amount with costs and} int€rest after giving due^{credit tothe amountalready} deposited, if any, within^{two monthsfrom receipt of a copy of} this^judgment. On^{such deposit,the petitioner is permittedto} withdraw the same. There^{shall be no orderas to costs'}

¶46

Miscellaneous petitions, if^anY are pending, shall

¶47

stand closed, as a sequel.

¶48

SD'-^{P PADMANABHA REDDY'} neotsrRAn. ,-. / */

¶49

,TTRUE^COPY" SECTION^OFFICER

¶50

To,

¶51

1 2 i[ff'-$tlffimi;,*"{trH'r'':;";r" 3 4 Two^{CD CoPies}

ADK

f 4
, I

HIGH COURT

DATED:0610912023

JUDGMENT

MACMA.No.3683 ot^2O12

¶59

e sTATE o
9
3 d 1B I[\ 1$i\ t
o *
I
DnoP,'1,

¶60

PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA
@'o
6\ <br>

¶61

IN THE HIGH^{COURT FOR THESTATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶62

WEDNESDAY,^{THE SIXTHDAY OF SEPT-EJ'BER} TWO THOUSAND^{ANDTWENfiTHREE}

¶63

PRESENT

¶64

THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICE NAMAVARAPURAJESHWAR RAO} MOTO R ACC^{IDENT CIVIL MISCE LLANEO US APPEALNO: 3683 oF 2012}

¶65

Between:

¶66

Smt. Gudala^{balamani, G.Shobha, Wo Gudda Gane-sh' Occ Labourer' R/o'} il:ii;;;i5^{-H;riiraga,virii-g;:jna'Mano"t'Ransa Reddv District'}

¶67

...APPELLANT'PETITIONER

¶68

AND

¶69

1 The A.P.S.R.T.C,^{Repby its Managing Director'RTC X Roads'} Musheerabad,^HYderabad

¶70

The^De pot Manager,^{A.P.S.R.T.CMidhaniBus Depot' Kanchanbagh'} Hydera bad

¶71

...RESPONDENTS'RESPONDENTS

¶72

Appeal filed^{UnderSection173 of Motor VehiclesAct against the Order and} decreeino.P'No'TTgof2olld,'tei..lgtoTlzol2.onthefrleofthecourtofthe chairman^{Motof Accidentcuims Tribunal-cum-Xl Additional chief Judge, (Fast} Tack Court)^{City Civil Court' Hyderabad'}

¶73

on {or hearing^{andupon perusingthe grounds of} oRDER: This^appeal "oming appeal, the^{Judgment and otree of the LowerCourt andthe materialpapersin the} Case and^{upon hearingtne a'g'mentsof SRI' B VENKAT REDDY' Advocate for the} Appellant^{and of sRl- c suNrixuunnREDDY (sc FORAPSRTC)' Advocate for} the Respondents

¶74

This Court doth Order^{and Decree as follows:}

¶75

That the Motor Accident Civil^{MiscellaneousAppeal be andhereby is partly} allowed

¶76

That the compensation amount awarded^{by the Court below is enhanced} from Rs.1,27,000/- toRs.1,55,5001^{(Rupees one lakh fifty five Thousand five} hundreci only) with interest at the^{rate of 7.5o/o per annumon the enhanced} compensation amount from^{the date of petition till the dateof realization.}

¶77

That the respondents are directed^{to deposit the said amount with costs and} interest after giving due credit to the^{amount already deposited,if any, within} two months from receipt of^{a copy of this judgment}

¶78

That on such deposit, the^{petitioner is permifted to withdraw the same}

¶79

That save as aforesaid,^{the decree oftheLowercourt shallstands confirmed} in all other respects; and

¶80

That there be no order^{as to costs in this appeal}

¶81

SD/.P PADMANABHA^REDDY, ASSTSTANT REGISTRAR.

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To, 1. The Chairman Motor Accident^{ClaimsTribunal-cum- Xl Additional Chief} Judge,^(Fast Tack Court)^{City Civil Court, Hyderabad}

¶86

1. Two CD Copies

ADK

HIGH COURT

2 DRAFTS

DATED:06l0gl2023

JUDGMENT+DECREE

MACMA.No.3683^{ot 2012}

¶95

PARTLY ALLOWING^{THE MACMA} cyvP tu

Smt. Gudala Balamani , G.Shobha v. the a.P.S.R.T.C., and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Gudala Balamani , G.Shobha v. the a.P.S.R.T.C., 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

The Depot Manager,Apsrtc, Hyd and Another Vs Sirisinagala Devender

Mangali Siddavva, and 3 Others Vs A.P. Mohammad and Another

Sirisingala Devender Vs Depot Manager, Apsrtc

Syed Durwesh Mohiuddin and 2 Others Vs a.P.S.R.T.C., and 2 Others

Kilaru Tharaka Prasad, Khammam District Vs K. Ajay Babu and Anr, Khammam

Boina Padmamma and 3 Others Vs D. Venkatesh and Another