Telangana High Court
M Shekar, Nizamabad vs Syed Chand, Nanded, M.S. And Anr on 6 June, 2023
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G. PRIYADARSINI
M.A.C.M.A.No. 2808 of 2017
JUDGMENT:
This appeal is preferred by the injured questioning the order and decree, dated 19.06.2017 passed in M.V.O.P.No.1838 of 2002 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-VIII Additional District Judge, Nizamabad (for short, the Tribunal).
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties have been referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 30.11.2000. It is stated that on the fateful day, the claimant was proceeding on his scooter to his house at Kotagally and when he reached near Padmashali Hostel, Nizamabad, one Jeep bearing No. MH 26 C 1282, owned by respondent No. 1, insured with respondent No. 2, being driven by its driver, came from opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner at high speed, dashed the claimant, as a result of which, the claimant fell down and sustained injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to Pragathi Hospital, 2 MGP, J Macma_2808_2017 Nizamabad and thereafter, he was admitted as inpatient at Medivision Hospital, Hyderabad. According to the claimant, he was hale and healthy and earning Rs.10,000/- per month as peon in SBH and Rs.5,000/- on agriculture. Due to the said injuries, he sustained permanent disability as he lost his right eye sight and lost his future earnings. Thus, he laid the claim seeking compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- against the respondents.
4. Before the Tribunal, the respondent No. 1 remained ex parte, the respondent No. 2, filed counter denying petition averments, disputing the manner of accident, nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, avocation and income of the claimant and further contended that the driver of the offending vehicle was not having valid driving licence. It is lastly contended that the claim as made is exorbitant and sought for dismissal of the claim petition.
5. Based on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues:
1. Whether the motor vehicle accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle Jeep bearing No. MH 26 C 1282 by its driver resulting in injuries to the claimant?
2. Whether the claimant is entitled for compensation. If so, what amount and from?
3. To what relief?3
MGP, J Macma_2808_2017
6. In order to prove the issues, PWs. 1 to 3 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.24 were marked on behalf of the claimant. On behalf of respondents, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced.
7. Considering the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal has partly allowed the O.P. and awarded an amount of Rs.1,35,000/- towards compensation to the claimant along with proportionate costs and interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of payment or realization against the respondents.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-claimant and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No. 2- Insurance Company. Perused the material available on record.
9. The learned counsel for the appellant-claimant has submitted that although the claimant, by way of medical evidence i.e. the evidence of P.W,2, eye specialist in Government Hospital, P.W.3, orthopedic surgeon, coupled with Exs.A.3, injury certificate; A.6, Medinova Diagnostic services report; A.7, Care Hospital report; A.8, CT scan brain report of Kamineni Hospital; A.9, MRCP report of Kamineni Hospital; A.10, CT scan 4 MGP, J Macma_2808_2017 and MRCP films of Kamineni Hospital; A.11, discharge summary of Kamineni Hospital dated 22.05.2013; A.12, discharge summary of Kamineni Hospital dated 19.09.2013; A.13, medical bills of Kamineni Hospital dated 11.09.2015; A.14, MRCP films of Kamineni Hospital dated 11.07.2014; A.15, Discharge summary and bill of Padmavathi Gastro & Liver Hospital, Nizamabad dated 21.07.2014; A.16, Discharge summary and bill of Padmavathi Gastro & Liver Hospital, Nizamabad dated 14.09.2014; A.17, discharge summary of Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences Ltd., Secunderabad dated 12.11.2014; A.18, discharge summary of Krishna institute of Medical Sciences Ltd., Secunderabad dated 09.12.2014; A.19, Discharge summary of Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences Ltd., Secunderabad dated 07.01.2016; A.20, Discharge summary of Pratibha Super Specialty Hospital, Nizamabad dated 08.07.2016; A.21, CT Scan of Brain report, Amurtha CT Scan, dated 30.06.2016; A.23, disability certificate dated 21.01.2015 and A.25, original disability certificate issued by PW.3, sufficiently established that the claimant has sustained 40% permanent and partial disability due to concessional head injury with fracture scapula right mal unite causing episodes of giddiness and painful and right shoulder movement, right knee, dislocation of right shoulder, fracture of right hand, skull, ribs 5 MGP, J Macma_2808_2017 and incurred huge medical expenditure, the Tribunal awarded meager amount towards compensation and prayed to enhance the same taking into consideration of 40% permanent disability and the nature of injuries. This Court has perused the entire evidence available on record and is of the opinion that the doctors have issued the said disability certificate under Exs.A.23 and A.25 after thoroughly examining the injured. Hence, considering the evidence of PWs.2 & 3 coupled with Exs.A.23 & 25, this Court is inclined to fix the permanent disability at 40% as assessed by the doctors.
10. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2-Insurance Company sought to sustain the impugned award of the Tribunal contending that considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant and the period of treatment, the learned Tribunal has awarded reasonable compensation and the same needs no interference by this Court.
11. As regards the manner of accident, the Tribunal after evaluating the evidence of PW. 1, coupled with the documentary evidence available on record i.e., Ex.A1-First Information Report and Exs.A2, charge sheet, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of Jeep bearing No. 6 MGP, J Macma_2808_2017 MH 26 C 1282. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the said findings of the Tribunal which are based on appreciation of evidence in proper perspective.
12. Coming to the quantum of compensation, according to the claimant, apart from Rs.5,000/- per month on agriculture, he was earning Rs.10,000/- as peon. In order to prove his income, he filed Ex.A.24, salary certificate, however, none was examined to demonstrate the salary certificate's issuing party's authority. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the claimant, the Tribunal has not awarded any amounts towards loss of income during the period of treatment and loss of income due to disability. In Latha Wadhwa vs. State of Bihar1, the Apex Court has held that even though there is no proof of income and earnings, the income can be reasonably estimated. Hence, considering the avocation of the claimant, this Court is inclined to fix the monthly income of the injured at Rs.4,500/- and award Rs.4,500/- towards loss of earnings during the treatment period of one month; Rs.3,24,000/- (Rs.4,500/- x 12 x 15 x 40/100) towards loss of earnings due to disability as per the Exs.A23 & A.25 issued by the certified doctors after examining the injured; Rs.35,000/- towards one grievous injury i.e., head 1 (2001) 8 SCC 197 7 MGP, J Macma_2808_2017 injury; Rs.20,000/- towards simple injuries; Rs.30,000/- towards medical bills; Rs.25,000/- towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges and Rs.25,000/- towards pain and sufferings. Thus, in all the claimant is entitled to Rs.4,59,000/-.
13. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A. is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.1,35,000/- to Rs.4,59,000/- to be payable by the respondents. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. The amount shall be deposited within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the same. No costs.
Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_______________________________ JUSTICE M.G. PRIYADARSINI 06.06.2023 gms