IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN Present HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.4093 of 2003 Between: N. Ramanatha Reddy .. Appellant AND The Managing Director, Tiruvallurvar Transprot Corporation Limited, Having its office at Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 600 002. .. Respondent The Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.4093 of 2003 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the award in M.V.O.P.No.176 of 1998, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, Chittoor, dated 03.10.2002. 2. The appellant claimed to be standing by the side of the road on 05.10.1997 at about 8.30 a.m. at Konapareddipalle Harijanawada when the bus No.TN 72N 0520 of Tiruvalluvar Transport Corporation Limited, Chennai, driven rashly and negligently, hit the appellant and another and dragged them to some distance before the bus hit a tamarind tree. The appellant claimed to have suffered grievous injuries and to have been treated at C.M.C. Hospital, Vellore, incurring an expense of Rs.50,000/-. Pakala Police registered Crime No.93 of 1997 and prosecuted the bus driver in C.C.No.98 of 1997, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Pakala. Hence, the appellant sought for a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- from the corporation claiming that he was earning not less than Rs.1,00,000/- per annum from cultivation of Ac. 5.00 of land and business in coconuts and milch cows. 3. The corporation contested the claim denying the allegations of the claimant and contending that the claimant and another were coming on a motor cycle behind the bus in high speed and they themselves dashed against the rear side of the bus and sustained injuries. The contributory negligence of the claimant resulted in the accident and the claim is bad for non-joinder of the owner and insurer of the motor cycle. Hence, the corporation desired the claim to be negatived. 4. The Tribunal framed issues on the responsibility for the accident and the entitlement of the claimant to compensation and examined P.Ws.1 and 2 and R.W.1 and marked Exs.A-1 to A-5 during the course of enquiry. In fact, R.W.1 was examined in O.P.No.199 of 1998 arising out of the same accident and the same evidence is treated as evidence herein on a memo by the respondent. 5. The Tribunal rendered the impugned award firstly referring to the evidence of P.W.1 and the contents of Ex.A-1-First Information Report as probablising the accident to have happened due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver. The Tribunal referred to Ex.A-7 in the connected O.P.No.199 of 1998 which photograph probablised the said conclusion. The Tribunal then considered the quantum of compensation with reference to the total absence of any reference to owning any land by P.W.1 and the absence of any corroborating evidence for the alleged business in coconuts and milch cows. Presuming the claimant to be living by doing coolie work, the Tribunal assessed the monthly income at Rs.750/- per month at Rs.50/- per day for 15 days in a month. Loss of earnings at Rs.1,500/- for two months and Rs.7,000/- towards medical expenses shown by Ex.A-3-Medical Bills were considered payable and with reference to Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, fixing a minimum compensation of Rs.25,000/- even for no fault liability, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.25,000/- with interest at 9% per annum and proportionate costs. 6. The claimant was aggrieved by the meagre compensation against his claim for Rs.2,00,000/- and contended herein that the positive evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 and Exs.A-1 to A-5 should have led to the grant of the entire compensation. 7. Sri S.V. Muni Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant is heard and the respondent corporation is unrepresented during hearing on the last occasion and on this occasion also in spite of the matter being posted ‘for orders’. 8. C.M.A.SR.No.65032 of 2003 said to have been filed by the corporation against the same award was recorded by the Registry to have been dismissed on 15.03.2005. 9. The conclusion of the Tribunal about the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver leading to the accident is not in question in this appeal by the claimant. The just and adequate compensation payable to the claimant with reference to the injuries suffered in the accident and their consequences is the only question herein. 10. The claimant as P.W.1 claimed that he sustained fractures in both the legs and the left hand and injuries all over the body for which he was treated at C.M.C. Hospital, Vellore, for four days and later by P.W.2. He claimed to be unable to walk for long distances and did not claim any other disability left due to the impact of the accident. The claimant did not produce the accounts said to be maintained in connection with his business and made no reference to the specific agricultural lands owned by him. There are no documents produced by him to show the ownership and cultivation of any lands or the business carried on by him. Apart from the absence of any supporting oral evidence for the interested and self-serving claims of P.W.1, the evidence of P.W.2, the doctor, about the disability suffered by P.W.1 in the left fore arm, right knee, right leg and right ankle was not specifically claimed by P.W.1 himself. The doctor did not claim that he treated P.W.1 at any time as claimed by him and he claimed to have issued Ex.A-4-Permanent Disability Certificate only with reference to Ex.A-2-Wound Certificate issued by C.M.C. Hospital, Vellore, and the old x-rays. 11. Keeping the said evidence in view, in the absence of any proof of the agricultural or business activity of the claimant, the income presumed by the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, even in respect of non-earning persons can be taken as the basis for assessing the compensation and for the age of 45 years of the claimant, the appropriate multiplier applicable would be 14 as per SARLA VERMA AND OTHERS VS. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER[1]. If there was total loss of earning power, it would be equal to Rs.2,10,000/- and even if the effect of four injuries sustained by P.W.1 resulted in the alleged disability, the same can be considered effecting about 10% functional disability with reference to the whole body and the avocation of P.W.1. The claimant would be, hence, entitled to Rs.21,000/- towards loss of earning power. Ex.A-2-Wound Certificate read with Ex.A-4-Permanent Disability Certificate shows that the claimant had suffered four grievous injuries and seven simple injuries in the accident and adopting the same scale fixed by the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the claimant will be entitled to Rs.27,000/- for pain and suffering. In so far as medical expenses are concerned, the Tribunal took into account Ex.A-3- Medical Bills and the inevitability of some more expenses while granting Rs.7,000/- under that head. The same can be maintained and hence, the just and adequate compensation for which the claimant will be entitled can be quantified at Rs.55,000/- in which assessment, of course, an element of guess and estimate becomes inevitable. 12. On the enhanced portion of compensation, interest can be levied only at 6% per annum in view of the length of time for which such interest has to be paid, while proportionate costs, of course, shall follow suit. 13. In the result, the award, dated 03.10.2002, in M.V.O.P.No.176 of 1998, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, Chittoor, is modified by awarding a further compensation of Rs.30,000/- 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. 14. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed, accordingly, in part without costs. _____________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date: 3rd March, 2011 KL HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.4093 of 2003 Date: 3rd March, 2011 KL [1] 2009 ACJ 1298