Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 18632

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
V. Sujatha, J
Doredla Setu Madhav – Appellant
Versus
Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation – Respondent
MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NOS: 5 AND 421 OF 2023

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Siva Prasad Katakamsetty, Aravala Rama Rao
For the Respondents: Aravala Rama Rao, Siva Prasad Katakamsetty

Appellate courts will not interfere with a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's assessment of disability and compensation when it is based on consistent medical testimony and legitimate application of the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, particularly in the absence of evidence contradicting the tribunal's findings.

Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 166 (Second Schedule) - Motor accident claim - Injury - Quantum of compensation - Assessment of disability - Claimant sustained multiple fractures, tendon lacerations, and nerve damage while riding a bicycle - Tribunal awarded Rs.3,95,500/- based on 30% disability and notional income of a student - Claimant sought enhancement claiming higher disability and income; Respondent sought reduction challenging causation and lack of evidence - Court held that Tribunal’s assessment of 30% disability based on medical testimony and absence of contrary evidence is just and reasonable - Income assessment applying Second Schedule of Act for a non-earning student upheld - Finding of negligence against bus driver sustained based on FIR and charge sheet. (Paras 14, 15, 17)

Facts of the case:
The claimant, a student, was severely injured after his bicycle was hit by an APSRTC bus. He sustained fractures, nerve damage, and traumatic optic neuropathy. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.3,95,500/-, which both the claimant and the Corporation challenged in cross-appeals.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the evidence of the treating doctor and the documentary evidence provided a sound basis for the disability assessment. The calculation of compensation for a non-earning student using the Second Schedule was deemed appropriate, and no valid grounds were presented by either party to warrant interference with the Tribunal's findings.

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's assessment of permanent disability and compensation for a non-earning student was just and reasonable, and whether the finding of rash and negligent driving against the transport corporation was correct.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of medical certificates, a tribunal may rely on the oral testimony of a treating physician to assess disability, and for non-earning minors/students, the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act provides a legal framework for reasonable notional income assessment, which appellate courts should respect unless shown to be perverse.

Result: Appeals dismissed.

Table of Content
1. overview of accident claim, procedural history, and tribunal award. (Para 1)
2. summary of rival contentions regarding compensation amount and extent of disability. (Para 10 , 11)
3. court's findings on negligence, evidentiary assessment of medical issues, and affirmation of compensation. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)

APHC010005672023

[3333]

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 5/2023

Between:

1. DOREDLA SETU MADHAV @ MADHAV, S/O. VARA PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, D.NO. 25-18-97, SAMPATH NAGAR, GUNTUR CITY, GUNTUR DISTRICT. (THE APPELLANT WAS DECLARED AS MAJOR AS PER ORDERS IN I.A.1411/2022 DATED 20-6-2022)

...APPELLANT

AND

1. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REP. ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, GUNTUR. JCJC GUNTUR

2. SUDHEPALLI DURGA RAO, S/O. VENKATESWARLUU, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, TADIKONDA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. (DRIVER OF THE RTC BUS AP 07 Z 0064) (THE 2ND RESPONDENT IS NOT NECESSARY PARTY AS NO CLAIM IS MADE AGAINST HIM IN THE APPEAL)

...RESPONDENT(S):

Appeal filed under Order 41 of CPC before the High Court pleased to set aside the Judgment and decree passed in M.V.O.P.1311 of 2016 on the file the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Guntur dated 28-10-2022 and enhance the amount of compensation as entitled by the appellant together with interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum from the date of filing the Original Petition till the date of realization and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit her to amend the amount of compensation claimed from Rs. 5.00,000/- to Rs.12,00,000/- in the Original Petition in MVOP No.1311/2016 on the file the court of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Guntur and to pass

Counsel for the Appellant:

1.SIVA PRASAD KATAKAMSETTY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.ARAVALA RAMA RAO(SC FOR APSRTC KKAC)

MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 421/2023

Between:

1. APSRTC, REP. BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, GUNTUR

...APPELLANT

AND

1. DOREDLA SETU MADHAV/MADHAV, S/O VARA PRASAD, AGED 19 YEARS, R/O HNO. 25-18-97, SAMPATH NAGAR, GUNTUR CITY, GUNTUR DISTRICT

2. SUDHEPALLI LINGARAO, S/O VENKATESWARLU, AGED 53 YEARS, OCC. RTC DRIVER, TADIKONDA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. (RESPONDENT NO.2 IS NOT NECESSARY PARTY)

...RESPONDENT(S):

Appeal filed under Order 41 of CPC before the High Court pleased to set aside Decree and Award dated 28.10.2022 passed in M.V.O.P No. 1311 of 2016 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum Principal District Judge, Guntur and consequently dismiss the claim Petition and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to condone the delay 126 days in filing the above M.A.C.M.A. in MVOP No.1311 of 2016, dt.28.10.2022 on the file of Motor Accident Clams Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Guntur and pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2023

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of operation of Decree and Award dated 28.10.2022 passed in M.V.O.P No. 1311 of 2016 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum Principal District Judge, Guntur and pass

Counsel for the Appellant:

1.ARAVALA RAMA RAO(SC FOR APSRTC KKAC)

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.SIVA PRASAD KATAKAMSETTY

The Court made the following:

COMMON JUDGMENT:

Since both the appeals arise out of the same award, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of them by way of this common order.

02. M.A.C.M.A. No.5 of 2023 is filed by the claimant and M.A.C.M.A. No.421 of 2023 is filed by APSRTC, challenging the order and decree dated 28.10.2022 passed in M.V.O.P.No.1311 of 2016 on the file of the Motor Accidents C

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 18632

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESHV. Sujatha, JDoredla Setu Madhav – AppellantVersusAndhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation – RespondentMOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NOS: 5 AND 421 OF 2023

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
V. Sujatha, J
Doredla Setu Madhav – Appellant
Versus
Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation – Respondent
MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NOS: 5 AND 421 OF 2023