K.Satyanarayana v. B.Ramulu , Ramu

HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE M.S.K.JAI SWAL M.A.C.M.A.No.1088 of 2010 JUDGMENT:

The appellant is the injured. He filed the appeal questioning the award passed by the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cumI Additional District Judge, Vizianagaram (for short 'the Tribunal') in O.P.No.14/2009, dated 31.03.2010, by and under which the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.75,000/- as against the claim of Rs.1,50,000/- Briefly the case of the appellant is that on 14.06.2008 at about 2 p.m he was proceedings along with some passengers in his auto on the extreme left side of the road, another auto bearing registration No.AP35U-4068 came in opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed his auto, due to which, the auto of the claimant turned turtle and the claimant and passengers sustained grievous injuries. The claimant sustained fracture to his ribs. He was aged about 38 years and earning Rs.

4,000/- per month by running his auto at the time of accident. The 1st respondent is the driver of the offending vehicle and the 2nd respondent is the insurer. On behalf of the claimant PWs 1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A1 to A7 were marked. On behalf of the respondents, no oral evidence was adduced, but the insurance policy was marked as Ex.B1. The Tribunal, after taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence, determined the compensation at Rs.75,000/- together with interest @6% p.a.

The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is grossly inadequate and even though the claimant spent larger amount towards medical expenses, but the Tribunal awarded only Rs.3,000/-, that the Tribunal granted lesser interest @6% p.a. instead of

MSKJ,J macma_1088_2010 @7.5% p.a. and hence it is a fit case where the amount of compensation to be enhanced.

The learned counsel for the insurance company submits that the appellant sustained grievous and simple injuries, for which the Tribunal determined the compensation based on the evidence available on record, which is just and reasonable and does not warrant any enhancement. Heard both sides and perused the material on record. The factum of accident involving the vehicles, the date, time and place, and the fact of crime vehicle being insured with the 2nd respondentinsurance company are not in dispute. Similarly, the liability that is fastened on the respondents jointly and severally is also not challenged. The only claim of the appellant is that though he sustained fracture to his ribs and other injuries, the Tribunal has not awarded just and reasonable compensation and only awarded a compensation of Rs.75,000/- as against the claim of Rs.

1,50,000/- Upon carefully perusing the oral and documentary evidence on record and also the impugned award, it is noticed that the Tribunal has taken into consideration the evidence of PW 2-the medical officer and awarded a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards medical expenses, Rs.3,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.70,000/- towards permanent disability, in all awarded a compensation of Rs.75,000/-, which cannot be said to be in any way inadequate or unjust, and hence there are no grounds to enhance the same. However, it is observed that the Tribunal awarded interest @6% p.a. on the compensation amount, but it should be @7.5% p.a.

Subject to the above modification, the MACMA is allowed in part. The respondents, within a period of two months from today, shall deposit the compensation amount together with proportionate costs and interest thereon

MSKJ,J macma_1088_2010 @7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. No order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in consequence.

____________________ M.S.K.JAI SWAL, J Date: 19th June, 2017 Dsr