THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

JUDGMENT:

This appeal is filed by the appellant/petitioner under Section 173 of the M.V.Act against the Award and decree passed by the Chairman,, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal – cum – VI Additional District Judge), Godavarikhani (hereinafter referred to ‘learned Tribunal’) in M.V.O.P.No.29 of 2015, dated 06.02.2019.

2. The brief facts of the case are that earlier claimant/ petitioner had filed the claim petition under Section 166 of M.V.Act seeking compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- for the injuries received in a motor vehicle accident alleged to have caused due to rash and negligent manner by the driver of the Lorry. It is contended that on 28.02.2013, the petitioner along with his friend went to Karimnagar on a motor cycle bearing No.AP-15-BE-9415 was returning from Karimnagar to Manthani and when they reached Gundaram Village, the respondent No.1 i.e., driver of lorry bearing No.AP-24-K-0457, came in opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and dashed the petitioner’s bike, due to which the petitioner who was pillion rider fell on the road and sustained grievous, simple injuries all over the body. Immediately, the petitioner was shifted to Government Civil Hospital, Peddapalli and for better treatment petitioner was shifted to Adhitya hospital, Hyderabad. The Police registered a case in Crime No.34 of 2013 against the driver of offending vehicle for the offence under Section 337 and 338 of IPC.

3. The contention of the petitioner before the learned Tribunal was that due to accident, the petitioner suffered fracture to his right leg, fracture to the medial border of patella, fracture of tibia with proximal 1/3rd extension and open fracture shaft humerus right displaced, apart from a laceration below the left eye brow, the petitioner was admitted and in the Adhitya Hospital from 01.03.2013 and discharged on 15.03.2013. While discharging, the doctors advised the petitioner to take bed rest for three weeks and advised him to undergo physiotherapy. Due to injuries sustained in the accident, the petitioner suffer pain and mental agony and he is unable to attend his normal duties, as such, petitioner claimed an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- under various heads as compensation for the said accident.

4. Before the learned Tribunal, the respondent No.1 & 2 Driver and owner of the crime Lorry remained ex-parte. The respondent No.3 & 4 – Shriram General Insurance Company Limited, filed common counter- affidavit, denying all the averments made in the claim petition, including the manner in which the accident took place, age, avocation and income of the petitioner and submitted that the accident occurred due to self negligence of the petitioner and further contended that the compensation claimed is excessive and prayed to dismiss the claim petition.

5. Basing on the pleadings and averments made by both the counsels, the learned Tribunal framed the following issues which read as under:

“1. Whether the motor vehicle accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the crime vehicle?

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation, to what amount and if so, from whom?

3. To what relief?

6. After hearing both the parties and their rival contentions and perusing the oral and documentary evidences placed by both the parties, the learned Tribunal allowed the claim in part and granted compensation of Rs.5,30,000/- along with interest @ 6 % per annum.

7. Being unsatisfied by the compensation amount awarded by the learned Tribunal, the present appeal is filed by the petitioner/claimant on the following among the other grounds that the petitioner was 22 years old as on the date of accident and is a photographer by profession and used to earn Rs.10,000/- p.m. Due to accident, the petitioner was admitted in the hospital from 01.03.2013 to 15.03.2013 and the petitioner suffered fracture to his right leg, fracture to the medial border of patella, fracture of tibia with proximal 1/3rd e