THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO C.M.A No.1627 of 2001 Date: 13.4.2010 Between: The APSRTC, Rep by its Vice Chairman & Managing Director, Mushirabad, Hyderabad. Petitioner. And Kompella Lalitha, Ramaraopeta, Kakinada –4, KDMC and another. Respondents. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO C.M.A No.1627 of 2001 JUDGEMENT: This appeal is filed by the A.P.S.R.T.C., challenging the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-VI Additional District Judge, Kakinada, East Godavari District in M.V.O.P.No.450 of 1997, dated 24.4.2001. The 1st respondent-Kompella Lalitha, who received severe injuries all over the body in the accident occurred on 11.8.1997 as a result of collision between two A.P.S.R.T.C., buses bearing Nos.AP 9Z 8592 & AP 10Z 515, filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by her in the said accident, and, the learned Tribunal, after making an elaborate enquiry, awarded compensation as claimed. Now the present appeal is filed by the A.P.S.R.T.C., contending inter alia that the compensation granted by the learned Tribunal is highly excessive and deserves to be reduced. I have heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the A.P.S.R.T.C., and the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent-claimant. Since there is a categorical finding basing on the evidence available on record holding that the accident occurred as a result of collision between two A.P.S.R.T.C., buses bearing Nos.AP 9Z 8592 & AP 10Z 515, which fact of course is admitted and the finding that it was due to rash and negligent driving of the 2nd respondent herein, being based on evidence does not require any further consideration. Moreover, the learned Standing Counsel for A.P.S.R.T.C., has also not laid much emphasis on the aspect as to whether the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the A.P.S.R.T.C., bus and his main contention is that the compensation is on higher side. The 1st respondent-Kompella Lalitha was studying in II Year B.H.M.S., in Aallu Ramalingayya Homeopathi Medical College, Rajahmundry. She is fair looking brilliant girl. While she was traveling in A.P.S.R.T.C., bus bearing No.AP 9Z 8592 from Kakinada to Rajahmundry, the unfortunate accident took place and another bus bearing No.AP 10Z 515 coming from Nidadavolu to Kakinda in the opposite direction, dashed against the bus in which she was traveling. In the accident, the 1st respondent received multiple injuries, which include a severe head injury and two fractures to the right leg, she became unconscious and she was initially admitted in Government General Hospital, Kakinada for treatment. Subsequently, she was shifted to Vijaya Nursing Home, Kakinada from there, in view of her condition becoming serious, she was shifted to Apollo Hospital, Hyderabad for better treatment on 19.8.1997 and she was treated there till 13.9.1997. She underwent several operations and also skin grafting. The evidence of P.W.2 Dr.Jayaram Chandra Pingle, who is a renowned Orthopedic Surgeon, shows that the 1st respondent sustained several injuries viz., 1. Fracture of Right Femur simple 2. Compound comminuted fracture of both bones of right leg with soft tissue loss. 3. Cerebral concussion. After her admission into the hospital, he was performed surgery on the right femur using interlocking nail fixation and also surgery to fracture right tibia with external fixator, and wound detriment under general anesthesia. He further deposed that on 25.8.1997, the 1st respondent had Micro Vascular Surgery conducted by Dr.Bharathendu Swain, Plastic Surgeon, using free flap transfer with gracilis muscular and split skin grafting was done. His evidence further disclosed that the 1st respondent was readmitted on 27.10.1997 and he performed bone grafting of right tibia, which was taken from the right iliac bone. Subsequently, R2 was discharged on 1.11.1997 and that on 24.4.1998, she was readmitted at which time, the external fixator to the right leg was removed on 24.4.1998 and a P.T.B. Orthosis was given to the right leg for support. She was discharged on 27.4.1998 and was reviewed periodically subsequent thereto. There is disfiguration on account of the injuries sustained, and she has a total disability of 25%. According to P.W.2, the 1st respondent required another surgery for removal of interlocking nail right femur and approximate cost of the surgery at Apollo Hospital, Hyderabad would be Rs.40,000/-. Ex.A14 the copy of the wound certificate and Ex.A17 which is the Discharge Summary issued by the Apollo Hospital, Hyderabad, disclosed the following injuries:- “1). Repeating the same they are fracture to right thigh bone, 2). Fracture to right leg bone, 3). A deep cut to her left leg, 4) A deep cut on her right neck, 5) A deep cut on her right eye near the eye brow, 6) A deep cut to her left neck also, 7) An injury to her right ear and unable to hear since the date of the accident 8) Injuries all over her face as glass pieces were penetrated 9) Contusions all over the body.” As per the evidence of P.W.2-Dr.Jayaram Chandra Pingle, the 1st respondent was unconscious for a period of one week after the accident, and thereafter, she underwent seven operations, and there is shortening of ½” of her right leg lower limb. There is complete loss of hearing in the right ear and the partial loss in the left ear, which disability is permanent. Thus, due to the injuries sustained by the 1st respondent, she sustained permanent disability and also the disfiguration was caused on account of the injuries, the future prospects of her carrier as well as marriage have been completely impaired. It is on record that she was unable to return to the college for one year. Accordingly, she lost one academic year and with great difficulty, could secure readmission into the college. Ex.A1, 21 Medical Bills duly filed before the learned Tribunal indicate that the 1st respondent incurred medical expenses for more than Rs.2,00,000/-. Thus, the 1st respondent is entitled for compensation for the 9 injuries sustained by her, for permanent disability on account of the shortening of her right leg, for permanent disability on account of the hearing impairment in both the ears, disfiguration, loss of marriage prospects, loss of amenities of life, pain and suffering and also loss of earning capacity. Considering all these aspects, the learned Tribunal arrived at the conclusion that the amount of Rs.10,00,000/- claimed by the 1st respondent as compensation is not on higher side and accordingly awarded the compensation as claimed. Upon perusing the entire material on record, including the order passed by the learned Tribunal, this Court is of the considered view that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is just and reasonable and requires no interference. However, the interest at the rate of 9% awarded by the learned Tribunal being on higher side is reduced to 7.5% from the date of petition till the date of realization. In the result, with the above reduction in the interest, the award passed by the Tribunal is confirmed and the appeal filed by the A.P.S.R.T.C., is partly allowed. _________________________ JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO Date: 13.04.2010 mrb