IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 2655 OF 2014

Appeal filed under Section 173 of M.V.Act against the order and decree dated 04.08.2008 passed in O.P.No. 91 of 2007 on the file of Court of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal- cum – Additional District Judge, Hindupur.

Between:

$\sqrt{ }$

Naveenkumar Kumara, Ramadasappagari Naveen $\omega$ S/o.Ramadasappa R/o.Valasa [V], amarapuram [M], Madakasira Taluk.

...APPELLANT/PETITIONER

AND

• 1. H.Shabber Khan, S/o.Haneef Khan, Aged about 27 years, R/o.D.No.1-165, Occ: Driver of Tempo No.TAG 2212, Amarapuram Village and Mandal.
• 2. K.Nabi Rasool, S/o.Karim Sab, Aged about 50 years, Occ: Owner of Tempo No.TAG 2212 R/o.Amarapuram Village and Mandal.
• 3. The National Insurance Company Ltd, rep by its Branch Manager Branch Office: Opp.RTC Bus Stand, Hindupur Town.

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

Counsel for the Appellant: Sri N ASWARTHA NARAYANA

Counsel for the Respondent 3: M/S A JAYANTHI

Counsel for the Respondent 1: Sri KATA SAMBASIVA RAO

The Court made the following:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO

M.A.C.M.A.No.2655 of 2014

JUDGMENT:

7

Aggrieved by the impugned Order dated 04.08.2008, passed in M.V.O.P.No.91 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal -cum- Additional District Judge, Hindupur, whereby an amount of Rs.20,000/- was awarded against the l^t and 2'^^ respondents, this instant appeal is preferred by the claimant for enhancement of compensation.

2. For the sake of convenience, both the parties in the appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed in claim application.

3. This aforesaid M.V.O.P.No.91 of 2007 was preferred by the petitioner under Sections 140 and 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short "the Act"), read with Rule 455 of Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 claiming compensation of Rs. 1,10,000/- on account of the injuries sustained by the

T

claim petitioner in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 13.09.2004.

4. Facts germane to dispose of the appeal may be briefly stated as follows

On 13.09.2004, at about 06.30 p.m. while the petitioner was travelling in a Tempo bearing No.TAG 2212 from Godanakunta to Amarapuram, when the Tempo reached near Anjaneyaswamy temple on Godanakunta - Amarapuram, Tank Bund road, the driver drove the Tempo in a rash and negligent manner and consequently, the Tempo turned turtle into a pit on the right side of the road and the petitioner and others fell down from the Tempo and received injuries. The petitioner was shifted to the private Hospital, Amarapuram and from there he was shifted to the Government Hospital, Madakasira for treatment and later, he was also treated by Dr. R.Balaji in Government Hospital, Hindupur. The petitioner received injuries on his left clavicle and other injuries all over the body. A case in Crime No.45 of 2004 was registered under

Section 337 and 338 of I.P.C., against the driver of the offending vehicle.

5. Respondent Nos. ¹ and 2 are remained exparte.

6. Respondent No.3 filed written statement denying claim of the claimants.

7. Based on the above pleadings of both the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues for trial:-

• Whether the petitioner sustained injuries in the road accident on 13-09-2004 on account of Tempo bearing No.TAG 2212 as alleged in the petition? 1.
• Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation if so to what amount and from which of the respondents? 2.
• To what reliep 3.

8. During the course of the enquiry, on behalf of the petitioner, PWs.l and 2 were examined and got marked Exs.Al to A5. On behalf of the respondent No.3, R.W. ¹ is examined and Ex.Bl to Ex.B3 are marked.

T

9. At the culmination of enquiry, on considering the entire material on record, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.20,000/- towards compensation against the Respondent Nos.l and 2, by exonerating the Insurance Company. Aggrieved thereby, the claimant filed this instant appeal questioning the legality of the order passed by the Tribunal.

10. Now the points for determination are:

• Whether the claimant is entitled for enhancement of compensation as prayed for? 1.
• Whether the order of the Tribunal needs any interference? If so, to what extent? 2.

POINTS:

11. The claim petitioner himself is examined as P.W.l. His evidence goes to show that on 13.09.2004, at about 06.30 p.m. when the Tempo bearing No.TAG 2212 (herein after referred to as "the offending vehicle") reached near Anjaneyaswamy temple on Godanakunta Amarapuram, the driver drove the Tempo in a rash and negligent manner, as a result of which, the Tempo turned turtle into a pit on the right side of the road and the petitioner fell down along with their ten (10) Milk Cans from the Tempo and the petitioner sustained grievous injuries. The evidence of P.W.l clearly goes to show that the petitioner is travelling in the offending vehicle as an owner of the goods i.e., Milk Cans.

12. The material on record reveals that the accident in question was occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the 1®^ respondent. Ex.Al certified copy of the FIR and Ex.A3 certified copy of the charge sheet. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer laid charge sheet against the 1®*^ respondent/driver of the offending vehicle. The Tribunal also came to the conclusion that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. Therefore, ¹ do not find any legal flaw or infirmity in the said finding given by the Tribunal. As seen from the material on record, the petitioner is aged about 20 years at the time of accident and he sustained one grievous injury in the said accident. Therefore, an amount of Rs. 15,000/ was awarded towards one grievous injury. Since the

5

petitioner also sustained some disability and the evidence of P.W.2 also supports the case of petitioner and considering the evidence of P.W.2, Doctor who treated the petitioner and on considering the Ex.A4, an amount of Rs.3,000/-was awarded towards nutrition of food, attendant charges and transport expenses. An amount of Rs.2,000/- was awarded towards medical expenses. An amount of Rs. 10,000/- is awarded towards disability sustained by the petitioner.

13. On considering the entire material on record, the Tribunal came to a conclusion that the petitioner is suffering with disability of 7.5%. As stated supra, the evidence of P.W. ¹ reveals that the petitioner was travelling in the offending vehicle/Tempo as an owner of the goods i.e.. Milk Cans. As seen from the material on record, Ex.Bl policy N.F.P.P. (Non Fair Paid Passenger), an amount of Rs.75/- was collected by the Insurance Company towards N.F.P.P. (Non Fair Paid Passenger) and the Ex.Bl reveals the same and the policy is in force, the risk of injured is also covered under the policy. Therefore, by applying the

6

decision of the Apex Court in Manuara Khatun and others Vs. Rajesh Kumar Singh and others^, since the offending vehicle is insured with Insurance Company and premium also collected for coverage of the policy, the respondent has to pay the total compensation of Rs.30,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum within two (2) months to the claimant and later recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle/2"^ respondent by filing an execution petition and without filing any independent suit.

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed, by enhancing the quantum of compensation of Rs.20,000/- 14. awarded by the Tribunal to Rs.30,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. The 3rd respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the total compensation of Rs.30,000/- with interest as ordered above within two (2) months from the date of this judgment, later recover the same along with interest from the owner of the offending vehicle Tempo/2r'd respondent by filing an execution petition and without filing any independent suit. On such

1 (2017) 4 see 796 deposit, the appellant/ claimant is entitled to withdraw the same along with interest thereon.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending,

shall stand closed.

SD/- SHAIK MOHD. RAFI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

• To,
  • 1. The Court of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Additional District Judge – Hindupur, Ananthapur District (with records if any)
  • 2. One CC to Sri N ASWARTHA NARAYANA Advocate [OPUC]
  • 3. One CC to M/S A JAYANTHI Advocate [OPUC]
  • 4. One CC to Sri KATA SAMBASIVA RAO Advocate [OPUC]
  • 5. The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (to dispatch records to lower court)

6. Three CD Copies

DPK

PRK

Chardona

HIGH COURT

DATED:14/08/2023

JUDGMENT+OECREE

MACMA.No.2655 of 2014

M.A.C.M.A IS ALLOWED IN PART

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 2655 OF 2014

Between:

Ramadasappagari Naveenkumar Naveen Kumara. $\bigcirc!!!!!{\scriptstyle\circ}$ S/o.Ramadasappa R/o.Valasa [V], amarapuram [M], Madakasira Taluk.

...APPELLANT/PETITIONER

AND

• 1. H. Shabber Khan, S/o. Haneef Khan, Aged about 27 years, R/o.D.No.1-165. Occ: Driver of Tempo No.TAG 2212, Amarapuram Village and Mandal.
• 2. K.Nabi Rasool, S/o.Karim Sab, Aged about 50 years, Occ: Owner of Tempo No.TAG 2212 R/o.Amarapuram Village and Mandal.
• 3. The National Insurance Company Ltd, rep by its Branch Manager Branch Office: Opp.RTC Bus Stand, Hindupur Town.

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

Appeal filed under Section 173 of M.V.Act against the order and decree dated 04.08.2008 passed in O.P.No. 91 of 2007 on the file of Court of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal- cum – Additional District Judge, Hindupur.

This Appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and the material papers in the Suit and upon hearing the arguments of Sri N. Aswartha Narayana for the Appellant and of Sri. A Jayanthi for the respondent 3 and Sri Kata Sambasiva Rao for Respondent 1.

This Court doth Order and decree as follows:

• 1. That the Appeal be and hereby is allowed in part
• 2. That the quantum of compensation of Rs.20,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is hereby enhanced to Rs.30,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.
• 3. That the $3^rd$ respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the total compensation of RS.30,000/- with interest as ordered above within two(2) months from the date of this Judgment, later recover the same along with interest with interest from the owner of the offending vehicle Tempo/2^nd respondent by filing an execution petition and without filing any independent suit.
• 4. That on such deposit the appellant/claimant is hereby entitled to withdraw the same along with interest thereon
• 5. That there shall be No order as to costs. In this Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

SD/- SHAIK MOHD. RAFI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

SECTION OFFICER

To

• 1. The Court of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Additional District Judge – Hindupur, Ananthapur District
• 2. Three CD Copies PRK

chardona

HIGH COURT

DATED: 14/08/2023

DECREE

MACMA.No.2655 of 2014

M.A.C.M.A IS ALLOWED IN PART