IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN Present HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.4175 of 2003 Between: M. Subba Rao .. Appellant AND Mohd. Sharfuddin & another .. Respondents The Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.4175 of 2003 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the award in O.P.No.1206 of 1998, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- District Judge, Ranga Reddy District, dated 01.10.2002. 2. The claimant/appellant was going in his Maruthi car No.AP 9M 708 on 05.11.1998 and near Vanasthali Timber Depot, lorry No.AHJ 4434, driven rashly and negligently in high speed, came in the opposite direction at about 5.30 p.m. and dashed against the Maruthi car. The claimant and another inmate fell on the road and sustained grievous injuries. The claimant sustained fractures to the right leg, right hand, bone below the right eye, clavicle and maxilla and grievous injuries to the head, right eye and elsewhere and he was treated till 19.11.1998 as inpatient in Kamineni Hospital and later as out patient. The claimant had undergone two surgeries and spent huge amount for treatment. Hence, he sought for a compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- from the owner and insurer of the lorry. 3. While the first respondent/owner of the lorry remained ex parte, the second respondent/insurer put the claimant to strict proof. 4. The Tribunal framed issues about the responsibility for the accident and the entitlement of the claimants to compensation and examined P.W.1 and marked Exs.A-1 to A-8 and B-1 during the enquiry. 5. The Tribunal rendered the impugned award firstly relying on the First Information Report-Ex.A-1, the Charge Sheet-Ex.A-3 and the evidence of the injured P.W.1 to conclude that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry by the driver. The Tribunal noted from the evidence of P.W.1 and Ex.A-4-Medico Legal Certificate about eight injuries noted on the person of P.W.1 and referring to the Discharge Summary-Ex.A-5, the Tribunal observed that P.W.1 underwent two surgeries. The Discharge Bill-Ex.A-6 was accepted to grant a sum of Rs.70,000/- towards treatment and Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering. As Ex.B-1-Insurance Policy shows valid and subsisting insurance for the lorry, the Tribunal made both the respondents jointly and severally liable for the total compensation of Rs.1,20,000/- with interest at 9% per annum and proportionate costs. 6. The claimant was dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation and desired that the entire compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- as claimed may be awarded. 7. Sri B. Parameswara Rao, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Srinivasa Rao Vutla, learned standing counsel for the second respondent/insurer are heard and the first respondent/owner of the lorry did not appear before this Court. 8. In so far as the conclusions of the Tribunal about the responsibility of the lorry driver for the accident, the existence of a valid and subsisting insurance policy with the second respondent and the ownership of the lorry with the first respondent are concerned, in the absence of any challenge by any party, they have become final. 9. The only question involved in this present appeal is the quantum of just and adequate compensation jointly and severally payable by both the respondents. 10. In so far as the medical expenses are concerned, whatever was spoken to by P.W.1 and proved by the documents was permitted by the Tribunal, even a little above the actual expenses shown by Ex.A-6-Medical Bills to round off to Rs.70,000/-. The Medico Legal Certificate-Ex.A-4, the Discharge Summary-Ex.A-5 and the O.P.Card-Ex.A-7 together may indicate five grievous injuries apart from some simple injuries on the person of P.W.1 which can be linked to the accident. The earliest version in Ex.A-1-First Information Report does not elaborate the grievous injuries suffered, but the final result of the investigation in Ex.A-3-Charge Sheet shows that the driver was prosecuted for causing grievous hurt to the injured. Ex.A-5-Discharge Summary shows the manner of treatment for a period of 12 days in the hospital as an inpatient and the advice at the time of discharge was to have strict bed rest for four more weeks. Ex.A-8-Income Tax Returns of the claimant for the period from 01.04.1997 to 31.03.1998 show the claimant to have paid income tax on a total income of Rs.1,15,613/-. The claimant may have to be taken as earning Rs.8,500/- to Rs.10,000/- per month at about the relevant time on the basis of such income tax returns. 11. In the claim petition, compensation was claimed for a permanent disability and there is no proof of any partial or total temporary or permanent disability. For pain and suffering, the claimant sought for Rs.20,000/-, while he requested for Rs.1,00,000/- towards medicines and treatment and under these two heads, in fact, the total of Rs.1,20,000/- was granted by the Tribunal. The Tribunal did not consider grant of any compensation towards transport, extra nourishment, damage to clothing and such other inevitable expenses as well as the loss of earnings. As the claimant appears to have been disabled from pursuing his avocation for about six weeks, a sum of Rs.10,000/- can be granted towards loss of earnings, while towards all other pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages including transport, extra nourishment and damage to clothing, another sum of Rs.5,000/- can be reasonably awarded. Addition of a sum of Rs.15,000/- to the compensation already awarded will be necessitated for granting just and adequate compensation to the claimant. The enhanced compensation can be directed to carry interest at 6% per annum in view of the length of time for which such interest has to be paid and proportionate costs shall follow suit. 12. In the result, the award, dated 01.10.2002, in O.P.No.1206 of 1998, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Ranga Reddy District, is modified by granting a further compensation of Rs.15,000/- with interest thereon at 6% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of realization and proportionate costs in addition to the compensation already awarded by the impugned award. 13. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed, accordingly, in part without costs. _____________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date: 24th February, 2011 KL HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.4175 of 2003 Date: 24th February, 2011 KL