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

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 2910

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
Golla Janardhan – Appellant
Versus
The General Manager – Respondent
WP 42967/2016



##PAGE1##

1

2026:APHC:4584

APHC010430052022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3333]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 323 OF 2022

Between:

1. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,

REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MUSHEERABAD,

HYDERABAD. (NOW IN RTC BUS STAND COMPLEX, VIJAYAWADA,

KRISHNA DISTRICT). (OWNER OF BUS BEARING NO. AP27 Z 0232)

...APPELLANT

AND

1. VEMULA HANUMANTHA RAO, S/O NARASIMHA RAO, 51 YEARS,

R/O 7TH LINE, A.T. AGRAHARAM, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. V KRISHNA REDDY, S/O SESHI REDDY, R/O MYNAMPADU

VILLAGE, SANTHANUTHALAPADU MANDAL, PRAKASAM

DISTRICT. (DRIVER OF BUS BEARING NO. AP27Z 0232)

...RESPONDENT(S):

Counsel for the Appellant:

1. ARAVALA RAMA RAO(SC FOR APSRTC KKAC)

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. B PARAMESEWARA RAO

The Court made the following:

##PAGE2##

2

2026:APHC:4584

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 323 OF 2022

JUDGMENT:-

The APSRTC filed the present appeal against the order and decree

16.03.2022 in M.V.O.P.No.271 of 2017 on the file of the Court of the Motor

Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional District Judge, Guntur (for brevity

‘the Tribunal’), whereby and whereunder the Tribunal granted compensation

of Rs.4,77,885/- to the claimant/respondent No.1 herein, as against the claim

of Rs.7,50,000/-, for the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident that

occurred on 17.10.2016.

2. For the purpose of convenience, the parties will be referred to as they

are arrayed before the Tribunal.

3. The case of the petitioner is briefly as follows:

On 17.10.2016 at about 4.45 p.m, while the Petitioner was walking in

the NTR Bus Stand, Guntur, the driver of the offending vehicle drove it in a

rash and negligent manner, at a fast speed and hit him. The tyre of the

offending vehicle ran over his right leg, as a result, he sustained grievous and

crush injury to his right foot. Immediately, after the accident, he shifted to

Government Hospital, Guntur and later he was shifted to Amar Orthopedic

Hospital, Guntur. Subsequently the first finger of right foot was amputated and

some portion of his right foot was also badly damaged. The Guntur Traffic

Police, registered a case in Crime No.203 of 2016 under Section 337 of IPC.

Therefore, the Claimant filed the claim petition.

##PAGE3##

3

2026:APHC:4584

4. Before the Tribunal, Respondent No.1 alone filed Written Statement

denying all material averments made in the claim petition and inter alia

contended that the offending vehicle was moved was not at all correct, where

there is a bus stand premises, the driver of the offending vehicle cannot go

without signal/ caution given by the conductor. The accident occurred due to

only careless, hurriedness and negligence on the part of the Petitioner and

there is no rash and negligence on the part of driver of the offending vehicle.

The claim of the Petitioner is excessive and without any basis. The

Respondent No.1 is not liable to pay any amount or interest more than 6% p.a

as per the guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. Hence, claim petition is liable

to be dismissed.

5. Basing on the pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues for

trial:

“1. Whether the accident occurred due to rash and negligence of driver of

APSRTC bus bearing No. AP 27 Z 0232?

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation for the injuries

sustained by him in the accident, if so, to what amount and from whom?

3. To what relief?”

6. On behalf of the claimants, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A1 to

A5 were marked. On behalf of Respondent No.2/APSRTC, R.W.1 was

examined and no document was marked.

7. After hearing both parties and after considering the oral and

documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition

##PAGE4##

4

2026:APHC:4584

against respondent Nos.1 and 2, awarding compensation of Rs.4,77,885/-

with subsequent interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filin

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