THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER M.A.C.M.A.No.2825 of 2007

JUDGMENT:

Aggrieved by the award dated 08.08.2007 in O.P. No.88 of

2006 passed by the learned VI Additional District Judge, (III-F.T.C.)- cum-the Chairman, Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims Tribunal, Warangal at Mahabubabad, the petitioner has filed this appeal for enhancement of the compensation amount.

2. Heard Sri A.Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Katta Laxmi Prasad, learned counsel appearing for respondents and perused the entire material on record.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the claimant was working as Hamali (who carries weights). On 15.09.2004, while he is coming from Julywadas to Madikonda on cycle with his friend, an auto bearing No.AP 36V 702 came in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and dashed to the cycle from behind, as a result, the said auto turned turtle. On account of the impact, the petitioner sustained four injuries i.e., i) Fracture radius bone of left wrist. ii) Fracture clavicle bone of left, iii) Fracture to left hip and iv) Abrasion 5x3 cms over left leg.

4. The Tribunal having examined P.Ws.1 to 3 and marked Exs.A1 to A24 and Ex.C1 and Ex.B1, granted an amount of Rs.4,000/- towards loss of earnings for two months, Rs.34,550/- towards medical expenditure and extra nourishment, Rs.14,803/- towards medical bills, Rs.1,000/- towards transportation, Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.38,400/- towards loss of future earnings, in total, granted an amount of Rs.1,12,753/- towards total compensation.

5. P.W.3-Doctor had given Ex.A10-Disability Certificate and deposed that he assessed the disability at 25% permanent in nature and he is unable to do his normal works. Since the claimant was working as Hamali, his job is lifting goods or weights in his normal course of work. In the event of disability at 25% permanent in nature, he is unable to do his normal works and the claimant cannot continue with his work as Hamali.

6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the judgment of “K.Janardhan Vs. United India Insurance Company Limited¹” held that the amputation of leg when the petitioner was driver, would result in 100% disability in earning capacity, similarly, in the present case, once the

2008 8 SCC 518 Hamali cannot undertake his normal works and the left hip is stiffen, this Court deems it appropriate to hold that it would be 100% disability in the present facts.

7. Further, the Tribunal calculated the income of the claimant at 2,000/- per month though the claim was made that he was earning Rs.8,000/- per month. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Ramachandrappa Vs. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited2” held that the minimum that could be assessed in respect of daily wage earner is Rs.4,500/- per month. Accordingly, this Court assessed the income of the claimant is at Rs.4,500/-per month and hence, loss of future earnings comes to Rs.8,64,000/- (4,500/- x 12 x 16). Hence, this Court is inclined to enhance the compensation only to an extent of loss of future earnings, in which, total compensation comes to Rs.9,43,353/-

8. In the result, the M.A.C.M.A is allowed enhancing the compensation amount granted by the Tribunal from Rs.1,12,753/- to Rs.9,43,353/-(Rupees Nine Lakhs Forty Three Thousand Three Hundred and Fifty Three only) with interest at the rate of 7.5 percent

2 2013 SCC 236

per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization to be payable by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severally within a period of one(1) month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit of the amount, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the same without furnishing any security.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

_________________

K.SURENDER, J Date: 14.02.2024 Lpd