THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

JUDGMENT:

This appeal is filed by the claimant aggrieved by the Order and Decree dated 16.11.2019 in M.V.O.P.No.482 of 2016 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-VIII Additional District Judge, Khammam (for short “the Tribunal”).

2. For convenience and clarity, the parties herein are referred to as they were arrayed before the Tribunal.

3. The case of the petitioner before the Tribunal is that on 04.04.2016 the petitioner was returning from Bhadrachalam to Ashwapuram on his motorbike and on the way when he reached Seetharampuram Village, the driver of the Tata Ace bearing No.AP- 20TB-2197 has driven the van in a rash and negligent manner at a high speed and dashed against the motor bike, due to which the petitioner fell down and sustained grievous injuries, resulting in amputation of right toe, and also several other fractures. He underwent treatment by incurring huge medical expenses.

Therefore, he claimed a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-.

4. The respondent No.1 has filed counter denying the manner of accident and also the age, avocation and income of the petitioner. He further contended that the driver of the van was holding a valid driving license and thus, only the respondent No.2 would be liable to pay the compensation if any.

5. The respondent No.2 has filed counter denying the age, avocation and income of the petitioner. He further contended that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligence of the petitioner and they further disputed the validity of driving license of the driver of the crime vehicle.

6. Based on the above pleadings, the tribunal has framed the following issues for trial:-

1. Whether the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of crime vehicle i.e., Tata Ace bearing No.AP-20TB-2197, occurred on 04.04.2016 ?

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

3. To what relief ?

7. To prove their case, the petitioners got examined PWs 1 to 4 and got marked Exs.A1 to A11. On behalf of the respondents, RW1 was examined and Exs.B1 and B2 were marked.

8. Based on the evidence adduced before it, the Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.2,52,000/-. Aggrieved by the said Order and Decree dated 16.11.2019, the present appeal is filed by the claim petitioner seeking enhancement of compensation.

9. Heard the submission of Sri G. Ravi Chandra Shekar, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Kondadi Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents.

10. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the Tribunal has failed to appreciate the fact of permanent disability sustained by the petitioner to the extent of 25% and that it has taken only 2% towards the loss of earnings of the petitioner. He further argued that the Tribunal has failed to appreciate Ex.A8/Salary Certificate of the petitioner and has taken his income to be very low as Rs.10,000/-. He further argued that the trial Court has not considered all the medical bills and has awarded very low amount towards medical expenses. He therefore, prayed to enhance the compensation.

11. The learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand has submitted that no proof of income is filed by the petitioner and that in the absence of proof, the trial Court has in fact rightly taken the earnings to be Rs.10,000/-. He further argued that loss of earning capacity as assessed by the Tribunal is 2% also is justified. He therefore, prayed to uphold the order and decree of the trial Court.

12. Based on the above rival submission, this Court frames the following points for determination:-

1. Whether the claimant is entitled for enhancement of compensation, if so, to what extent?

2. Whether the order and decree of the Tribunal need any interference?

3. To what relief? 13. Point No.1:

a) A perusal of Ex.A3/Medical Certificate reveals that the petitioner has sustained fracture of phalanx and also amputation of right big toe and little toe and also there i