SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(AP) 620

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
DUPPALA VENKATA RAMANA, J.
Gopireddy Mohan Reddy – Appellant
Versus
B.V. Mohan Reddy – Respondent
M.A.C.M.A.No. 588 of 2011
Decided on : 04-07-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : D KODANDARAMI REDDY

The main legal point established is the need for just and reasonable compensation for personal injury, considering the claimant's circumstances and the gravity of the injuries sustained.

Headnote:

Motor Vehicles Act - Compensation - 337 IPC - 338 IPC - 134(a) & (b) MV Act - 187 MV Act

Fact of the Case:

The claimant sought compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act for injuries sustained in a road accident. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.55,000 with interest against the 1st and 2nd respondents. The claimant appealed seeking enhancement of the compensation.

Finding of the Court:

The Tribunal's finding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver was upheld. The Court analyzed the evidence and legal principles related to compensation for personal injury, ultimately enhancing the compensation from Rs.55,000 to Rs.1,50,000.

Issues: 1. Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal requires enhancement? 2. Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or needs interference?

Ratio Decidendi: The Court applied legal principles related to compensation for personal injury, considering pain and suffering, loss of amenities, shortened expectation of life, loss of earnings, and medical treatment. It emphasized the need for just and reasonable compensation based on the claimant's circumstances and the gravity of the injuries sustained.

Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the compensation was enhanced from Rs.55,000 to Rs.1,50,000 with costs and interest at 7.5% per annum against the 1st and 2nd respondents jointly and severally. The respondents were directed to deposit the compensation amount within two months, failing which execution could be taken out against them.

JUDGMENT:

This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/claimant against the judgment and award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional District Judge (FTC), Kadapa (for short “the Tribunal”), dated 23.12.2005 in M.V.O.P.No.487 of 2003 by which the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.55,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition till realization against the 1st and 2nd respondents.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are arrayed before the Tribunal.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner/injured filed a claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for the injuries sustained by him in a road accident with the averments that he was the resident of Kondapeta of Chennur Mandal, that he was aged about 35 years, that he was doing finance business and was earning Rs.5,000/- per month. On 23.07.2002, when the petitioner was going towards Chagalamarri Village on a Suzuki motorcycle and reached near Chinthakunta tank, at about 8.30 a.m., a private bus bearing No.AP 04-T-6698 driven by its driver came in an opposite direction, without blowing horn and dashed against the motorcycle of the petitioner, as a result, he fell down and sustained fractures and other injuries all over the body. Immediately he was shifted to the Government Hospital, Proddatur for treatment and after discharge, he took treatment in a private hospital and also at bone setting centre at Puttur.

(ii) The matter was reported to the Police alleging that the accident took place as a result of rash and negligent driving of the said bus by its driver and based on the statement of the injured recorded by the Police, a case in Crime No.66 of 2002 was registered by Duvvur Police Station for the offence under Section 337 IPC. After investigation of the case, a charge sheet was submitted against the accused-driver for having committed the offence punishable under Sections 337 & 338 IPC read with Section 134 (a) & (b) read with Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

(iii) The 1st and 3rd respondents did not contest the matter.

(iv) The 2nd and 4th respondents filed a written statement denying the allegations made in the petition and the petitioner was put to strict proof that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the bus by its driver. It is contended inter alia that the petitioner has to prove that the driver of the bus and the rider of Suzuki motorcycle were having a valid driving licence at the time of the accident. It is further averred that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the injured person and these respondents are not liable to pay the compensation. Further, it is averred that the amount claimed by the petitioner is excessive and prays to dismiss the petition.

(v) On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues:

    (i) Whether the petitioner received injuries in a motor vehicle accident occurred on 23.07.2003 at 8.30 a.m., due to collision of a private Bus bearing No.AP 04-T-6698 of R.1 and Suzuki motorcycle of R.3 by its drivers?

(ii) Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation, if so, to what amount?

(iii) To what relief?

(vi) During the trial, in order to establish his claim, the injured/claimant was examined himself as P.W.1 and the other two witnesses were examined as P.Ws.2 and 3 and got marked Exs.A.1 to A.9 i.e., Certified copies FIR, Wound Certificate, charge sheet, Calendar and judgment etc. The 1st and 3rd respondents neither led any evidence nor marked any documents on their behalf. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the 2nd and 4th respondents.

(vii) The Tribunal, after analyzing the entire evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 and Exs.A.1 to A.9, came to the conclusion that the alleged accident

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          logo-black

          An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

          Please visit our Training & Support
          Center or Contact Us for assistance

          qr

          Scan Me!

          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

          whatsapp-icon Back to top