APHC010181172019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3505] FRIDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 544/2019 Between: 1. THE DEPOT MANAGER, APSRTC, VIZIANAGARAM DEPOT VIZIANAGARAM 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, APSRTC, HYDERABAD ...APPELLANT(S) AND 1. KANDUKURI HARIPRASADA RAO, S/O LATE RAMA RAO, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS TEACHER IN Z..P.HIGH SCHOOL GOVINDAPURAM VILLAGE, POOSPATIREGADA MANDAL VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT RESIDING NEAR SEVENTH DAY SCHOOL V.T.AGRAHARAM, VIZIANAGARAM 2. BALI GOPALAKRISHNA, S/O GURU MURTHY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS DRIVER OF APSRTC BUS NO. AP- 35-Z-0060, RESIDENT OF DASARI STREET, BELAGAM PARVATHIPURAM TOWN, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 Appeal filed under Order 41 of CPC before the High Courtto allow the appeal by setting aside the Judgment and Decree passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- IV Additional District Judge, Vizianagaram passed in M.V.O.P No. 104 OF 2016 dated 26.02.2019 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 of 16 days in filing the Appeal against the Judgment and Decree passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- IV Additional District Judge, Vizianagaram passed in M.V.O.P No. 104 OF 2016 dated 26.02.2019 and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2019 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 execution of Decree passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- IV Additional District Judge, Vizianagaram passed in M.V.O.P No. 104 OF 2016 dated 26.02.2019 pending disposal of the above M.A.C.M.A No. /2019 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 May be pleased to expedite the hearing in the present appeal by affixing a short date for final disposal of the present appeal and pass Counsel for the Appellant(S): 1. K SRINIVASA PRASAD SC For APSRTC Counsel for the Respondent(S): 3 1. SARIPALLI SUBRAHMANYAM 4 The Court made the following judgment: Aggrieved by order dated 26.02.2019 in MVOP No.104 of 2016, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- IV Additional District Judge, Vizianagaram, APSRTC filed the present appeal, questioning the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they were mentioned in the claim petition. 3. The petitioner filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act read with rules made thereunder, claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in the accident that occurred on 15.09.2015, due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the APSRTC bus bearing registration No.AP 35 Z 0060. 4. It was the case of the petitioner that, on 15.09.2015, while he was proceeding to APSRTC Complex, the offending bus driven by the 1st respondent came in rash and negligent manner, without following the traffic rules, and dashed the petitioner, whereby he fell down on the road and the bus ran over on his left leg. Immediately thereafter, he was taken to Tirumala Nursing 5 Home, Vizianagaram and later he was referred to Kanaka Durga Hospital, Visakhaoatnam. In the said hospital, the doctors, after conducting surgery, his left leg was amputated and skin grafting was done. Further, it was the case of the petitioner that he was treated as inpatient for about one month and thereafter he has taken follow-up treatment. A case in Cr.No.163 of 2015 was registered against the driver of the offending bus on the file of Traffic Police Station, Vizianagaram. Later, the same was investigated into and charge sheet was filed against the 1st respondent. It was further contented that the petitioner was working as Government Teacher (Secondary Grade Teacher) at ZP High School, Govindapuram and was drawing Rs.45,000/- as salary per month. In view of the amputation of his left leg and the injuries sustained by him, he approached the Tribunal seeking to pay compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- as against the respondent Nos.1 to 3. 5. The 1st respondent/driver of the offending bus remained ex-parte. The 3rd respondent filed counter affidavit and the same was adopted by the 2nd respondent. It was contended that the compensation claimed by the petitioner was excessive and there was no loss of income inasmuch as he continued to work as 6 Government Teacher. It was further contended that, there was no negligence on the part of the 1st respondent/driver and the accident was occurred due to the negligence of the petitioner himself, and prayed to dismiss the claim petition. 6. In order to prove the case of the petitioner he was examined as PW.1. One Sri A.Venkataramana, Headmaster, ZP High School, Govindapuram was examined as PW.2 and Dr.A.Sateesh who treated the petitioner was examined as PW.3. The petitioner also marked documents in Exs.A1 to A8. Ex.X1 was marked through PW1, Ex.X2 and X3 were marked through PW.2. On the other hand, the respondents neither adduced any oral evidence nor filed any documentary evidence. After enquiry, the Tribunal by order under challenge partly allowed the claim petition by awarding Rs.14,79,950/- under various conventional heads. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed. 7. The counsel for the appellant would submit that, the accident was occurred due to the negligence of the petitioner himself as he did not take due care while entering into the APSRTC complex. In order to substantiate his contentions, it is apparent from the record that APSRTC neither filed any 7 documentary evidence nor adduced any oral evidence. On the other hand, the petitioner filed copies of FIR and charge sheet which were marked in Exs.A1 and A4. A perusal of the contents of the above documents would go to show that the accident was occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the offending bus. Apart from the same, if there was no negligence on the part of the 1st respondent, he ought to have given complaint against the petitioner stating that he was responsible for occurrence of the accident. A perusal of the record would show that no such complaint was given. In such circumstances, it can be held that there was no negligence on the part of the petitioner and the accident was occurred due to the negligence of the 1st respondent/driver of the offending bus. Hence, the contention of the counsel for the appellant in this regard is liable to be rejected. 8. Coming to the quantum awarded by the Tribunal is concerned, it is not in dispute that the left leg of the petitioner was amputated. Further, the petitioner also got examined the Headmaster of the ZP High School in which he was working, as PW.2 A perusal of the evidence of the PW.2, it is clear that the petitioner was working as Secondary Grade Teacher in ZP High School, Govindapuram. In order to disprove the same, as already 8 noted supra, the respondents not placed anything on record. In those circumstances, the Tribunal by taking into consideration of the overall facts, awarded an amount of Rs.7,00,000/- for the loss of physical limb, apart from awarding other amounts towards various conventional heads and granted an amount of Rs.14,79,950/- as compensation. Though, the counsel for the appellant submits that the same is excessive, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal, inasmuch as, admittedly the petitioner suffered with amputation. Apart from the same, it is difficult for the petitioner to attend his day to day activities as he was before. Further, he has become handicapped and he has to suffer with the same throughout his life. Further, he has also filed a bunch of medical bills and the same were marked in Ex.A5. A perusal of the same would go to show that, he has spent an amount of Rs.3,54,081/- towards his treatment apart from other expenses. By taking into consideration of the facts of case of the petitioner, as already stated, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.14,79,950/- as compensation and the same cannot be found fault. 9. For the foregoing reasons, this Court does not find any merit in the appeal, accordingly, the same is dismissed. 9 There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________ JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR Dt.08.05.2026 DSB 10 27 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR MACMA No.544 of 2019 Date 08.05.2026 U DSB 11