Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(AP) 643

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
B.S. BHANUMATHI, J.
Betham Ravi [died] and others - Appellants
Versus
Shaik Nazeer Bhasha and another - Respondents
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No: 1175 of 2004
Decided on : 07-08-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : N. Subba Rao
For the Respondents: Gudi Srinivasu

The court emphasized that compensation for permanent disability must adequately reflect the impact on earning capacity, mandating a realistic evaluation based on facts and circumstances.

Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 173 - Award and decree challenged - Compensation for injuries awarded by the Tribunal was found inadequate. Court's rationale recognized permanent disability’s impact on earning capacity. (Para 12)

(B) Appeal - Compensation must reflect just and reasonable standards irrespective of claims made. (Paras 16, 19)

Facts of the case:
The claimants filed under M.V. Act seeking Rs.2,50,000/- for injuries sustained by the deceased in a vehicle accident involving negligent driving that resulted in amputation. (Para 4)

Findings of Court:
Tribunal originally granted Rs.25,600/- for injuries, but upon appeal, the court determined appropriate compensation of Rs.3,70,600/- for loss of earnings and suffering. (Paras 16, 19)

Issues: The adequacy of compensation awarded and assessment of permanent disability's impact on earning capacity were central concerns. (Para 14)

Ratio Decidendi: The court underscored that rigorous assessment of earnings loss is required when determining compensation for permanent disabilities, stressing the need for compensation evaluations based on factual circumstances. (Para 12)

Result: Appeal allowed; compensation enhanced to Rs.3,70,600/- with proportionate costs.

Table of Content
1. jurisdiction and parties involved in the appeal. (Para 1)
2. appellants contest tribunal's findings. (Para 10)
3. assessment of loss of earning capacity. (Para 12 , 13)
4. determination of appropriate compensation. (Para 14 , 15 , 16)
5. costs and interest determination. (Para 17 , 18)
6. final judgment and order. (Para 19 , 20)

JUDGMENT :

B.S. BHANUMATHI, J.

This appeal is filed under Section 173 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988, (in short "M.V. Act‟) against the award and decree dated 08.01.2004 in M.V.O.P.No.920 of 1999 on the file of the Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal -cum- District Judge, Guntur.

02. The appellants herein are the claimants and the respondents herein are the respondents before the Tribunal.

03. Initially, the claimant No.1 filed petition under Section 163-A of the M.V. Act seeking compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- for the injuries suffered by him in the accident. Pending adjudication of the claim petition, since he died, his legal representatives who are his wife, children and mother were brought on record as the claimants No.2 to 5.

04. The case of the claimants is briefly as follows:

a) While the claimant No.1 was going on his T.V.S. Moped towards Bandar Road, a lorry bearing No.ABK-1096 driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner in a rash and negligent manner at high speed dashed against his motor vehicle, as a result of which he received crush injury to his right leg. He was, admitted in a private hospital. Later, he was shifted to Government Hospital, Guntur where he was treated as in-patient for one month. His right leg was amputated up to knee. A case in crime No.134 of 1994 was registered in the IV Town Traffic Police Station, Vijayawada. He was aged 32 years and was earning Rs.2,000/- per month by doing wood centring work in building construction. He spent Rs.10,000/- for medicines, special diet and attendant charges.

b) The respondent No.1 remained ex parte.

c) The respondent No.2 filed a written statement opposing the claim and denying all the allegations. It was further contended that the vehicle insured by the respondent No.2 had never been involved in the accident and moreover, the driver of the said vehicle had no valid driving license at the time of the accident; that the deceased himself had been guilty of contributory negligence; and that the petition was bad for non-joinder of the owner and insurer of the scooter.

05. On behalf of the claimants, the claimant No.1 got herself examined as P.W.1, Ch. Prabhudas was examined as P.W.2 and Dr.S.S.V. Ramana was examined as P.W.3 and following documents were marked as evidence:

Ex.A1	C.C. of F.I.R. in Crime No.134/99 of IV Traffic Police Station, Vijayawada.
Ex.A2	C.C. of charge sheet in C.C.No.117 of 2000 on the file of the Court of Additional Special Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada.
Ex.A3	C.C. of M.V.I.'s report.
Ex.A4	C.C. of accident report.
Ex.A5	O.P. Chit issued by G.G.H., Guntur.
Ex.X1	Case sheet of B. Ravi maintained by G.G.H., Guntur.

06. The respondents neither examined any witness nor submitted any document as evidence.

07. The Tribunal found that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry. The Tribunal further observed that there is no evidence to the effect that the deceased / claimant No.1 died of injuries suffered in the accident and therefore, the amount of compensation was restricted to the amount of compensation payable for injuries suffered in the accident. The Tribunal granted Rs.10,000/- for medical expenses and other expenses for transportation till his death. It awarded Rs.9,600/- for loss of earnings and Rs.6,000/- for pain and suffering for a period of six months. Thus, in total, Rs.25,600/- was granted with proportionate costs payable by the respondents No.1 and 2 with joint and several liabilities along with interest @9% p.a. from the date of the petition till the date of realisation.

08. Aggrieved by the award, the claimants preferred this appeal.

09. The learned counsel