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

2026 Supreme(AP) 966

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Cheekati Manavendranath Roy, Tuhin Kumar Gedela, JJ.
Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company - Appellant
Versus
Dontala Govinda Rao, S/O Suryanarayana - Respondent
Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No: 819 of 2025
Decided On : 08-04-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Koraganti Sreenivasarao
For the Respondent: G Ramesh Babu

The determination of 'just compensation' in motor accident cases requires a pragmatic evaluation of the actual impact of permanent disability on an individual's earning capacity, rather than a mechanical application of disability percentages, ensuring the award reflects the claimant's real-world economic loss.

Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 166 - Motor Accident - Quantum of compensation - Permanent disability (80% amputation) - The Tribunal awarded Rs.61,89,998/- with 9% interest due to grievous injuries resulting in leg amputation and loss of earning capacity - Appellate court must rely on 'just compensation' principle as held in Pranay Sethi and Raj Kumar - Earning capacity is to be determined based on impact on professional life rather than automatic conversion of disability percentage - No evidence was adduced by the insurer to rebut the medical findings or the claimant's professional loss calculation.

Facts of the case:
The claimant, an MBA graduate and proprietor of a business, met with a motor vehicle accident on 08.12.2020 which resulted in the amputation of his right leg and multiple fractures of the left leg. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.61,89,998/- along with interest at 9% per annum. The insurance company appealed, challenging the quantum of compensation and the liability.

Findings of Court:
The court affirmed the Tribunal's findings, noting that the insurer failed to provide substantial evidence to counter the proof of injury, treatment expenses, and economic loss. The calculation of compensation across several heads (pain and suffering, medical expenses, disability) was found to be sound and consistent with Supreme Court precedents.

Issues: Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is excessive and whether the interest rate of 9% is justified in light of the injuries and evidence produced.

Ratio Decidendi: The Tribunal is required to determine 'just compensation' by assessing the actual impact of permanent disability on the claimant's earning capacity, independent of a fixed percentage, while maintaining a pragmatic approach to reality.

Result: Appeal dismissed; Tribunal judgment confirmed.

JUDGMENT :

Tuhin Kumar Gedela, J.

Heard,

Sri Koraganti Sreenivasa Rao, learned counsel for the appellant, and Sri G.Ramesh Babu, learned counsel for the respondent No.1/claimant.

1. The parties are arrayed as arrayed in the present appeal.

2. Dissatisfied with the Judgment and Decree dated 28.01.2025, passed in M.V.O.P.No.778 of 2021, by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal- cum-XII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”), wherein a sum of Rs.61,89,998/- was awarded as compensation with subsequent interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition i.e., 28.04.2021, till the date of payment, the Insurance Company preferred this appeal.

3. The facts germane to decide the issue are capsuled as hereunder:

(i) The respondent No.3 before the Tribunal is the appellant herein; the claimant before the Tribunal is respondent No.1 and respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein are the driver and owner of the lorry respectively.

(ii) The petition filed before the Tribunal was under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, r/w Rule 455 of A.P. Motor Vehicle Rules, claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,00,000/- for the grievous injuries sustained in the accident occurred on 08.12.2020 at 08.40 p.m. at Vegetable Market, Anandapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. The vehicle involved is a lorry bearing No.TN88A9924, driven by the driver-2nd respondent herein and the 3rd respondent herein is the owner of the lorry.

(iii) The claimant is an MBA graduate residing at Anandapuram village, aged about 28 years and unmarried. On the night of 08.12.2020, while he was returning from his work place i.e., Rushikonda to his house at Anandapuram on his motorcycle wearing a helmet and when he reached Vegetable Market, Anandapuram, Visakhapatnam District, at about 08:40 p.m., a goods carrier lorry bearing No.TN88A9924, driven by the driver in a rash and negligent manner at high speed came from the side of Pendurthi towards Anandapuram and dashed against the motorcycle of the petitioner from behind due to which the accident occurred rendering the legs of the petitioner crushed besides injuries, as a result the right leg of the petitioner above knee was amputated and the left leg is multiply fractured and has undergone several operations and hospitalized for 22 days.

(iv) The claimant further asserts that academically he stood in first division in the year 2016 and has bright academic record throughout and is in search of job. He attempted the State Service Examinations. The claimant is running a business of his own under a proprietary concern in the name and style of VIZAG BEACH BIKES, and in tune to the same, he purchased 10 motorcycles on loan and his monthly earning is Rs.1,50,000/-. To substantiate this, he filed the bank statement and he repaid the loan amount within a short period.

(v) The claimant states that he is the sole breadwinner in the family consisting of aged parents and a younger sister who is mentally challenged and the claimant is taking care of the sister. Due to the accident, the dreams of the petitioner are nipped off at the budding stage because of the negligent driving of the driver and he lost his future on the economic front and also the dreams of having a beautiful wife and children and a family is eternally lost and has to live alone. A confirmed marriage alliance was also broken due to the accident and the claimant is having no other properties to support himself or his family and the father of the claimant is an agricultural coolie.

(vi) The claimant further specifically pleaded that the pain and suffering endured by him cannot be explained in words and unable to sleep for an hour a day during his days at hospital. Though he was administered with medication and sedation, suffered from pain and mental trauma. In consonance to the above facts and circumstances, claimed a sum of Rs.1,00,00,000/- as compensation.

(vii) The claimant took treatment as inpatient in Q1 Hospitals, Visakhapatnam from 09.12.2020 to

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