Allowed

G.Vijaya Kumar , Vijaya Chandra v. E.Shankar

Telangana HC25 Jan 2024MACMA/2429/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the motor accident civil miscellaneous appeal filed by a pillion rider seeking enhanced compensation for injuries sustained in a motorcycle accident. The court enhanced the award from Rs.45,000 to Rs.88,000.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs.88,000 with interest at 7.5% per annum; Insurance company directed to deposit the amount within two months.

G.Vijaya Kumar , Vijaya Chandra Vs E.Shankar — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

( 321s 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI

¶6

MOToR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 2429 OF 2008

¶7

Appeal filed under section 173 of M.V. Act., against the Common order and decree dated 06.09.2007 passed in O.P.No.849 of 2005 on the file of the Court of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-l Additional District Judge) at Mahabubnagar.

¶8

Between:

¶9

G-Vijaya Kumar Aliyas Vijaya Chandra, S/o G.Rajanna, aged 22 years, Occ: Student R/o Appannapally Village, Mahabubnagar (Mandal and District).

¶10

...APPELLANT/PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 . E.Shankar, S/o E.Balaram, Age Major, Occ: Business, Owner of Motor Cycle No. AP 22 G 9506 Fyo Appannapally Village, Mahabubnagar (Mandal and District)

¶13

The New lndia Assurance Company Limited, rep by its Divisional Manager O/o.Divisional Office HDCT Complex, Railway Station Road, Kurnool.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶15

Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. T DAMOOAR

¶16

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Smt I MAAMU VANI

¶17

The Court made the following: JUDGMENT

¶18

'I'HE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G. RADHA RANI

¶19

M.A.C.M.A.No.2429 of 2008

¶20

JUDGMENT:

¶21

This appeal is lllecl h-r the in.iurcd rlarrnrr,t rggrieved by the award and decree passed by the Nlotor Accident Clairns I ribunal (for short "MACT"') - cum - I Additionat District Judge, Mahabubnagar in O.P.No.849 of 2005 dated 06.09.2007. seekir-rg crrhanccr rrc,.rt o l' colnpcn:iatiori

¶22

The appellant claimant llled the clairn petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act statinq that he w'as agcd 20 vears and was a student of B.Com. R/o.AppannrPallr \ rllrgc. \lahabuhrurrar I)istrict. On 10.09.2005 at about U-i:15 PNl. r^hile irc uas trarellinu as a pillion rideron the motorcycle of respondent No.l Baja.i C.l - 100 lrearing No z\t'-ll-G-9506 and when respondent No.l reached []r-trndur.ut l'crrrrl [)rrr,rp rr rthin th- lrurits of r\ppannapall], Village of Mahabubnagar District. the ridcr ol the rnotorcvcte dlove the same in a rash and negligent manncr and hit another rnotorcrcle bearing No.AP-22-F-0835, which was taking tLrrnin,, t()\:r'd: ih,.' Pctrol I'Lrrnp, due to which both the motorc),c!ists al<;rxr \ rLl) lhe (laint:uri lcll tlorrrr rrnd sustainecl multiple grievous and bleeding injurics. lhc l)olicc lVlahabubnagar Rural registered a case in Crime No.l77 ot l0()i Lrrrclel Seirion ll!i ol'lPC asainst the rider of the motorc_'cle bc'itt irrrt^'r.t, \i'-ll^(.i-()i0(r _.\licI tlte lccident. the petitioner was

¶23

¶24

I i I

¶25

DT.GRR'^J macma^2429-2008

¶26

immediatety^{shiftedto SVS l{ospital' Mahabubnagarfor treatment'He} sustained^{sweltingon left thigh' a laceratedwoundon left knee and sustained} fracture^{shaft of upper one-thirdiemur right and unden:ent surgeryon} 15.09.2005,^{inter-lockingnaiting femurright knee wasconductedand skin} ' nediat^{knee was also done'He was admittedas in-} grafting of^woundoverr patient in^{SVS Hospital for a period of 45 daysfrorn10'09'2005to 24'10'2005'} Thereafter,^{he was advisedbedrest for a period of tkee months from the date ol} discharge.^{He spentan amount ol Rs' l9'745i- towardshis treatment and he} could^{not continue his education atld was subjectedto pain and sufferingdueto} the injuries.^{As such, claimed compensationof Rs' 1'00'000/-fromrespondent} Nos.l^{and 2, the ol'ner and insurer of the Bajaj CT-100motorcyclebearing} No.AP-22-G-9506

¶27

The respondent^{No'lremainedex-parte'}

¶28

The respondent^{No 2 filedcounter and called for strict proof ol the} petition^{avcrments' The respondentNo'2 contendedthat the pillionriderwas} not entitled^{to an) compellsationas per the tenns and conditionsof the policy'} 'f he compensation il- any was^{payable by the owner and insurerof the} rnotorcycle^{bearingNo'AP-22-F-0835and they were also proper and uecessar</sup> panies to^{thc proceedingsThe amount of Rs' 1'00'000/- clairned as} conrpensation^{rvas excessive,arbitrary and prayed to dismiss the petition'}}

¶29

¶30

Dr.GRR, J macma 2429 2008

¶31

The Tribunal framed the issues and passed a comrnon order along with O.Ps.833 of 2005 and 848 of 2005, wherein the injured motorcyclist of the motorcycle bearing No.AP-22-F-083 5 also claimed compensation for the injuries sustained by him along with the petition filed by the owner of the said motorcycle c{aiming damages lor damagel to the motorcyc le Hero Honda bearing No.AP-22-F-083 5

¶32

The appellant - claimant exarlincd himsell as PW.3 and stated that due to the accident he sustained fracture shaft of upper one-third femur right, swelling on left thigh, laceration on leti knee and other injuries all over the body. Immediately, after the accident he rias shitted to SVS hospital, Mahabubnagar, where he was treated as in-patient tbr a period o f'^-15 days frorn 10.09.2005 to 24.10.2005. During the period of treatment. he underwent operation on 15.09.2005 and interlocking nailinu rnrl skin graltinc was also done. At the time of discharge, he was adi'iscd bcd rest tbr three months. He lost his precious academic year, as he u as bed ridden

¶33

He got examinerl the Associltc Plof essor ol'()rthopedics in SVS Hospital as PW.5. PW.5 also stated that thc appellant - clairnant was admitted in their hospital on 10.09.2005 with injury to right leg. l'he clairnant sLrstained fracture shaft of right I'emur, closcd intcrlockins nailirrs opcration was done on 15.09.2005 and skin grafting operati()n was dottc on i0.09.2005 and was discharged on 24.10.11t0-i. Ihr ll'rrcruri \as unircd and idenrilled Exs.Ai4 to

¶34

Dr.GRR,. macma 2429^2fi)E

¶35

A l 9 (discharge Summary,^{out-patient card, medical examinationreport,} prescriptions, medical bills^{and X-ray films of theirhospital).He stated that} another operation^{was required lor removalof interlocking nails,whichmight} cost around Rs.15,000/-^{to Rs.20,000/-and stated that the injury might have} taken six months^{time to heal.}

¶36

Basing on such evidence,^{the Tribunalaward€d Rs.15,0001 towardspain} and sutfering, Rs.29,000/-^{towards medicalexpenses,Rs.t,000ltowards extra} nourishment and^{Rs.500/- towards transportationcharges. In total, awardedan} amount of Rs.45,500/-^{(roundedolf to Rs.45,000/-) and held the respondents I} and 2^jointly and^{severally tiable to pay the said compensationwith interest @} 7.5o/oper annum^{lromthe dateof petitiontilI the date of deposit'}

¶37

g. Aggrieved by the^{saidawardand decree,the appellant} -^claimant preferred this appeal^{contending that the Tribunal failedto awardreasonable} and^just compensation^{under all the headsunder which the accident victims} were entitled.^{Thc Tribunal en.cdin awardinga meager amount inspite of the} grievous injuries susrained^{b1 him and the prolonged treatment taken by him} and prayed to^{cnltancc thc cornpctlsation.}

¶38

Heard Sri^{-[.Damodar.learncdcounsel for the appellant} -^claimantand Smt.l.Maamu^{Vani, leamed couuselfbr the respondent No.2} -^Insurance Company.

¶39

¶40

¶41

Dr.GRR, J macma 2429 2008

¶42

l l' The learned counsel ror the appe.anr conrended rhar the Tribunal failed to consider the future ross of eaming capacity, shortened expectation of life and failed to award attendant charges and ror ross of marriage prospects and the inconvenience caused to the craimant. The amounts awarded rowards pain and suffering, extia nourishment and transportation were also meager. No amount was awarded towards future medical expenses required ror removal of nails and prayed to enhance the compensation.

¶43

12' The leamed counser for the respondent No.2 - lnsurance company on the other hand contended that the future ross or earning capacitv and ross of amenities in life wourd be awarded only in cases .r'perrnanent disability. But, as the claimant had not sustained any permanent disabirity, no amounts need to be awarded under the above heads. As the pctitioncr \as a sturrent. no amount need to be awarded under the head loss o1'c-ar.nirrqs. J he intcrest aii,arded if any has to be reduced to 6%o on the enhanced anrounr, as per thejudgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Benson Georgc r.. Reliancc (iencral Insurance Company Limited & Anotherr.

¶44

l3' considering the contentions of'both the rearned courser, rhe point now that arises lor consideration is whethcr trrc rrLla.turl of-c.rnpers.rtion aw.arded by the Tribunal is just and reasonablc.

¶45

(l0ll) Ii S('C t42

¶46

¶47

Dr.GRR, J macma 2429 2008

¶48

As seen from the evidence of PWs.3 and 5, the petitioner sustained fracture shaft of right femur and an interlocking nailing operation was done on

¶49

15.09.2005 and skin grafting operarion was also performed on him , on 30.09.2005 and he was admited as in-patienr in SVS hospital for a period of 45 days from. 10.09.2005 to 24.10.2005. As such rhe amount of Rs.15,000/awarded by the Tribunal towards "pain and suffering" is considered as meager. Considering that two operations were performed on him and admitted as inpatient for a period of 45 days, the amounr awarded by the Tribunal under this head can be enhanced to Rs.10.000/-.

¶50

As some of the family members might have attended to him during the period of his admission in the hospital and subsequently during the period of his recovery by leaving their uork and no arnounr w.as awarded by the Tr.ibunal towards attendant charges, it is considered flt to award an amount of Rs.10,000/- under this head. As an amounr ol Rs.29.000/- is awarded towards medicines, basing upon F-x.A lil. rhe salne rruuld require no interference. However, as the evidence ol PW.5 would disclose that the petitioner also required another surger)' fbr lenroval of' nails and assessed the same as Rs. 15,000/- to Rs.20,000, -. iL is considcred lir to award an amount ol Rs.15,000/- towards futurc nrcdical requirernents ol the claimant. The amounts of Rs.1,000/- and Rs.500- arvarded touards cxtra nourishment and

¶51

¶52

Dr.GRR, J macma 2429 2008

¶53

\ \

¶54

transportation respectiVely by the Tribunal are also considered as meager. As such, it is considered fit to enhance the said amounts to Rs.2,000/- each

¶55

As such, the compensation entitled by the appellant claimant under

¶56

various heads is as follows:

¶57

o N S	Heads	Com ensation Awarded
	Pain and Suft'erin	Rs.30.000/-
2	MedicalExpenses	Rs.29.000r-
J	Futurernedicalexpenses	Rs.15.000/-
4	Attendantcharges	Rs.I0.000r
)	Extra nourishment	Rs.2,000/-
6	Transportation	Rs.2.000r-
Total:		Rs.88,0001

¶58

As such, it is considered fit to enhance the compensation fiom

¶59

Rs.45,000/- awarded by the Tribunal to Rs.88,000/-, which is considered as jusr arrd reasonable

¶60

ln the result, M.A.C.M.A is allowed enhancing the cornpensation trom Rs.'15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal to Rs.88,000/-.^'fhe sarnc- should carry intcrest lii 7 .5 %o per annum on the enhanced atnounr. I he rcsponderlr No.] lnsurance Company is directed to deposit the said anrounr w'ithin a period ol two rnonths from the date of receipt of a copy of this -iudgrnent after deducting tlrr- anlount deposited ilany earlier. On such clcposit. rhe appcllant clairnant is

¶61

permitted to w,ithdraw the entire amount as and ! herl de posited

¶62

¶63

Dr.GR]'., macma 2429 200u

¶64

No order as to costs.

¶65

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending in this appeal if any,

¶66

shall stand closed.

¶67

¶68

Sd/. P.CH.NAGABHUSHAMBA
ASSiSTANTFEGPTnAR /
//TRUE COPY// A/' /
sEcfldfl oFFtcER .:ll,

¶69

To 1 . The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-l Additional District Judge, Mahabubnagar. (With Records if any)

¶70

One CC to SRl. T DAMODAR, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRl. I MAAMU VANI, Advocate [OPUCI 4. Two CD Copies pr sh ,V

3 rf1t
"3,iiBf-;

HlGH COURT

DATED: 2510112024

JUDGMENT MACMA.No.2429 of 2008

¶76

1 I
s
o
k
i Jo() 1B tiP fl 2r24

k n ?
-s: ,

¶77

ALLOWING THE MACMA

¶78

\l-Y
r5\3\ >+

¶79

tN THE HIGH^{COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶80

MOTO

¶81

THURSDAY, ."._TWO,THOUSAND^{THE TWENTYF1FTHDAY OF JANUARY} AND^{TWENTY FOUR}

¶82

PRESENT

¶83

THE HONOURABLE^{DR.JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI}

¶84

ctD IVIL MISCEL EO S APPE NO: 2429 F 200

¶85

,':,j,,',
: i,,-.nl r'
-11 i,,"
' i:: .Yll

¶86

Between:

¶87

SJi,sxi#lff^{iluX'dil"iillaa,:1il],';3;"i#,&ft1h?l+,?,3Hfl,,3i,J0'-"'*'}

¶88

...APPELLANT/PETITIONER

¶89

AND

¶90

1 . E.Shankar,^{S/o E'Balaram, Age Major' Occ: Business' Owner of Motor Cycle No'} AP 22G9506^{R/o Appanffi lli fiii"g"' Mahaouunagar (Mandal and Diskict)}

¶91

'6?3S,3g,Soi?#i"5f,^{lbt,"3T,fl ?LI-f l$l#;J"&i'Y#'J:.ilil,"/#3i*}

¶92

...RESPONOENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶93

Appeal filed^{under section173of Ivl.V Act} '^{against the Common orderand} decree dated^{06.09.2007 passedin O P No.849 of 2005 on the fite of the Courtof} theMotorAccidentsclaimsTribunal-lAdditionalDistrictJudge)atN/lahabubnagar.

¶94

oRDER: This^{appealComingon for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of} appeal, the Judgment^{and Decree of the Tribunal and the materialpapers in the} Case and upon^{hearing the argumentsof SRI T DAMODAR' Advocatefor the} Appellant and^{of Sri Smt I MAAMU VANI'Advocate for the Respondent No'2 and} None Appeared^{for the RespondentNo 1}

¶95

' .-r l;. -.a'iff.:t ,: .:;T,:H:Fij+

¶96

. -,-l .
,'r:'llii,.;
:ifi'.

¶97

.''

¶98

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

¶99

That this^{Appeal be and herebyis allowed enhancing the compensation from} RS.45,000!awardedbytheTribunaltoRs.SS,000/.andShouldCarryinterest @7^{.5o/.per annum on the enhanced amount;}

¶100

j r'r rii -

¶101

That the Respondent No.2 lnsurance Company be and hereby is directed to deposit the said amount within a^period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this^judgment afler deducting the amount^{deposttedif any earlier;}

¶102

That on such deposit, the appellanlclaimant be and hereby is^permitted to withdraw the entire amount as and when deposited;

¶103

',:it

¶104

That save as aforesaid, the decree of the Tribunal shall stand confirmed in all other respects; and

¶105

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

¶106

¶107

Sd/- P.CH.NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANT REGIST 9611!an\ a .eQ_

¶108

1 . The l,'lotor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-l Additional District Judge, Nlahabubnagar.

¶109

1. Two CD Copies

,,- ,i' . .i

.,::,

.i: i+t:

HIGH COURT

DATED: 2510112024

. : :li !'^lt: : :..

ffir

DECREE MACMA.No.2429 of 2008

¶118

,!.:

¶119

ffi{

¶120

!*t;i? r1i 9l'^r.:: '..,.-t^:l

¶121

ALLOWING THE MACMA

G.Vijaya Kumar , Vijaya Chandra v. E.Shankar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Vijaya Kumar , Vijaya Chandra v. E.Shankar

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 New India Assurance Company Limited, Vs Burugula Venkateshwar Reddy

The National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs Baba Sharaduddin , Sharfuddin and Another

Chinnala Chandraiah Vs Chinnala Kistaiah

New India Assurance Co.,Ltd Vs Alisha Siddiqui and 10 Others

R Indira Devi Vs G Satyaki

Patancheru Narsimha Vs R.Rachanna