S.Arun Kumar vs. Sm.M.D.Arshad

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH

M.A.C.M.A.No.1111 OF 2009

JUDGMENT:

The claimant has filed the present appeal against the order dt.09.01.2009 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum IV Additional Sessions Judge, Tirupati, Chittoor District in M.V.O.P.No.42 of 1996 by granting a compensation of Rs.6,94,335/-.

2. Originally the petitioner/appellant/claimant filed a petition under section 166 of the M.V.Act claiming compensation of Rs.12,00,000/-. As against it the lower Tribunal granted compensation of Rs.6,61,135/- by its order dated 08.10.1999. As against the said orders the petitioners preferred C.M.A.No.743/2001 before this Hon'ble Court. The said C.M.A. was allowed in part confirming the findings of the Tribunal in respect of first issue i.e. with regard to rash and negligence on the part of the respondents and as far as the claim is concerned the matter is remanded to the Tribunal with a direction to give opportunity to both parties to adduce fresh evidence and decide the O.P afresh in accordance with law. After the matter was remanded to the Tribunal, the petitioner filed I.A.564 of 2008 to enhance the compensation from Rs.12,00,000/- to Rs.25,00,000/-. On 17.7.2008 the said I.A. was allowed.

3. After remanding the matter, PW1 who is the petitioner herein was further examined and PW2 to PW6 are also

examined onbehalf of the petitioner and Ex.A16 to A20 were marked.

4. Basing on the evidence and the material available on record, the lower Tribunal has taken the income as Rs.42,000/- per annum and basing on the evidence of PW4 Dr.B.Sukumar, Orthopedic Surgeon, disability certificate was marked as Ex.A6, accordingly 60% disability was taken into consideration and applied multiplier 18. Accordingly granted Rs.4,53,600/- as compensation in that head.

5. The main contention of the appellant in the present appeal is that he has claimed Rs.1,50,000/- for attendant charges and he mainly contended that he engaged a male servant by name B.Subrahmanyam by paying Rs.3,000/- per month and he was also examined as PW2. But the lower Tribunal has disbelieved the version of PW2 as well as the claimant stating that the petitioner was examined in chief on 16.2.1999 before the Tribunal passed orders in the O.P, has not stated about engaging the said person as attendant in the earlier occasion, hence the court has disbelieved.

6. Needless to mention that the said orders were interfered by the Hon'ble Court in C.M.A.No.743 of 2001 and while remanding gave a clear direction to the Tribunal that to give opportunity to both the parties by adducing evidence and decide the O.P. afresh. Inview of the above findings of the High Court the lower Tribunal disbelieving the statement of PW2 only on the ground that the same was not brought before Tribunal on the earlier occasion. Inview of the statement made

2

by PW2, the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- is awarded under this head in addition to the compensation of Rs.5,000/ awarded by the lower Tribunal.

7. Secondly he has contended that the appellant has claimed compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- towards future medical expenses.

8. Originally the petitioner/appellant claimed compensation of Rs.2,15,000/- towards future medical expenses. But after remanded to lower Court, the petitioner has filed Ex.A8 certificate said to have been issued by Dr.Ranganadham Huggli, Apollo Hospital, Chennai, wherein it is specifically mentioned that the petitioner is required Rs.3,00,000/- to undergo further operation and also he has filed Ex.A19 certificate issued by PW3 Dr.V.Sunandha Kumar Reddy stating that the petitioner requires around three to four lakhs to undergo further surgery. Without any reason the lower Tribunal has disbelieved the two documents only on the ground that if really the petitioner/appellant/claimant had these documents on or before 08.10.1999 would have filed in the earlier occasion itself before pronouncement of the orders dt.08.10.1999. This may not be a ground for rejection because of the observations of the High Court in C.M.A.No.743/2001. Accordingly the appellant is awarded compensation of Rs.7,00,000/- in addition to the compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- already awarded by the lower Tribunal.

9. Inview of the above reasoning the appeal is partly allowed by modifying the award dt.09.01.2009 by enhancing attendant

3

charges of Rs.1,00,000/- and future medical expenses of Rs.7,00,000/-, in addition to the compensation already awarded by the lower Tribunal under those heads.

10. Inview of the above findings the C.M.A. is allowed directing the respondents 1 and 2 to pay compensation amount of Rs.14,94,335/- (Rupees fourteen lakhs ninety four thousand three hundred and thirty five only) (including the compensation awarded by lower Tribunal) together with interest @12%pa from the date of the petition till the date of earlier order dt.08.10.1999 and thereafter 7.5%pa till payment. Accordingly this CMA is disposed of. No costs.

_____________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH

Dt: .02.2020 Rd

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH

M.A.C.M.A.NO.1111 OF 2009

Dated: .02.2020

Rd