In serious cases of injury, where there is specific medical evidence corroborating the evidence of the claimant, compensation can be granted under the heads of loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability, future medical expenses, loss of amenities, and loss of expectation of life.

JUDGMENT :

This appeal is preferred by the Appellant/APSRTC, challenging the award dated 08.10.2015 passed in M.V.O.P.No.593/2014 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunalcum-IV Addl.District Judge, Kadapa, wherein the Tribunal while partly allowing the petition, awarded compensation of Rs.2,81,400/- with interest @ 7.5% P.A. from the date of petition, till the date of realisation to the respondent/claimant for the injuries sustained by the claimant.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are arrayed as parties in the lower Court.

3. As seen from the record, originally the petitioner filed an application U/s.166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for brevity “the Act”) claiming compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- on account of the injuries and disability sustained by the petitioner in a motor vehicle accident occurred on 26.02.2013 while the petitioner as a Beldari, went to Lakkireddipalli Village to attend Beldari work at Radhakrishna Temple and at about 08.00 a.m. when he was collecting stones at Radha Krishna Temple in Lakkireddipalli Village, on left side of road margin on Rayachoti-Vempalli road, meanwhile APSRTC bearing No.AP28Z 5623 driven by its driver from Rayachoty, in a rash and negligent manner, with high speed, without blowing horn, dashed the claimant, as a result, he fell down and sustained injuries.

4. The facts show that on 26.02.2013 while the petitioner as a Beldari, went to Lakkireddipalli Village to attend Beldari work at Radhakrishna Temple and at about 08.00 a.m. when he was collecting stones at Radha Krishna Temple in Lakkireddipalli Village, on left side of road margin on Rayachoti-Vempalli road, meanwhile APSRTC Bus bearing No.AP28Z 5623 driven by its driver, in a rash and negligent manner, with high speed, without blowing horn, dashed the claimant, as a result, he fell down and sustained injuries i.e., laceration on left forearm, contusion over occipital region and tenderness over chest region. The petitioner was shifted to Primary Health Centre, Lakkireddipalli Village for treatment. After taking treatment at Primary Health Centre, Lakkireddipalli Village, the petitioner was shifted to Himalaya Hospital, Kadapa, where operation was conducted on 28.02.2013 and petitioner took treatment till 09.03.2013. The petitioner suffered unbearable pain and suffering and he is not in a position to do any work. The petitioner spent Rs.1,00,000/- towards treatment and medicines, Rs.5,000/- towards attendant charges, Rs.5,000/- towards transportation charges and Rs.15,000/- towards extra nourishment.

5. Before the Tribunal, the respondent/APSRTC, filed written statement while traversing the material averments with regard to proof of age, avocation, monthly earnings of the petitioner, manner of accident, rash and negligence on the part of the driver of the crime bus, nature of injuries, medical expenditure, alleged permanent disability and liability to pay compensation and contended that the petitioner sustained only simple injuries and that there is no permanent disability to him and he is attending his normal duties as earlier. The claim is high and excessive.

6. On the strength of the pleadings of both parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues:

1. Whether the claimant received injuries in a motor vehicle accident due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of APSRTC Bus bearing No.AP 28Z 5623 on 26.02.2013 at 08.00 a.m.?

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from whom?

3. To what relief?

7. To substantiate his claim, the petitioner examined P.Ws-1 and 2 and got marked Exs.A-1 to A-4. On behalf of the respondent/APSRTC, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced.

8. The Tribunal, taking into consideration the evidence of P.Ws-1 and 2, coupled with Exs.A-1 to A-4, held that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the APSRTC Bus driver, and further, taking into consideration of the evidence of P.Ws-1 and 2 corroborated by Exs.A-1 to A-4, awarded a com