1 MACMA NO. 302 OF 2022 VS,J. APHC010415562022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 302/2022 Between: 1. AMMALADINNE SAINATH REDDY, AGED 38 YRS S/O MADHAVA REDDY, R/O BASAMVARIPALLI VILLAGE NALLAMADA MANDAL, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT ...APPELLANT AND 1. GOILA SIVA, AGED 38 YRS, S/O GOLLA PUJARI RAMNJINEYULU R/O D.NO.1-30, NUTHIMADUGU VILLAGE, KAMBADUR MANDAL, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT (DRIVER OF CARE BEARING NO. AP 21 AH 3063) 2. P DHANUJAYA, S/O P.HANUMANTHAPPA R/O MUNDINAYANAPLLI VILLAGE, KALYANDURG MANDAL ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT (OWNER OF CAR BEARING NO. AP@AH3063) 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD, REP BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER ANANTAPURAMU (INSURER OF CAR BEARING NO. AP@AH3063) ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 MACMA NO. 302 OF 2022 VS,J. Counsel for the Appellant: 1. HARISH KUMAR RASINENI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. B PARAMESEWARA RAO 2. The Court made the following: 3 MACMA NO. 302 OF 2022 VS,J. THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 302/2022 J U D G M E N T: 1. This Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (for short MACMA) has been preferred by the claimant/Petitioner seeking enhancement of compensation amount being aggrieved by the Award passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short MACT) –cum- District Judge, Anantapur, in M.V.O.P.No.291 of 2016 dated 28.03.2022, wherein the Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.9,46,631/- as against the claim of Rs.12,00,000/-. For the sake of convenience and to avoid confusion, the parties herein after are referred to as they were arrayed before the Tribunal i.e., Appellant as claimant/Petitioner; and Respondents as Respondents. 2. This petition is filed by the petitioner under section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act and Rule 455 of A.P. Motor Vehicle Rules, initially, claiming compensation of Rs.12,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident, later he got enhanced his claim from Rs.12,00,000/- to Rs.18,00,000/- as per orders in I.A.No.1200 of 2019 dated 07.11.2019 on the ground that he sustained 55% of disability due to the injuries sustained in the accident. 4 MACMA NO. 302 OF 2022 VS,J. 3. Brief averments of the claim petition in MVOP No.291 of 2016 are that – on 22.09.2015 the petitioner and another were proceeding on a motor cycle bearing No.AP21 AA 8740 from Ammavaripalli to Kalyanadurg very slowly on extreme left side of the road. When they reached Puttakanuma Forest at about 4.00 P.M., a car bearing No.AP 21 AH 3063 came in opposite direction driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, with high speed, lost control over the same and dished against the motorcycle on which the petitioner and another were proceeding. As a result, the petitioner sustained facture of right thigh, fracture of right knee, grievous injury to right arm, grievous injury to right elbow, grievous injury to right forearm and other parts of the body. The right patella was completely broken and the petitioner is now totally confined to bed. i. Immediately after the accident, the petitioner underwent treatment in Government General Hospital, Ananthapuramu, St. John's Medical College Hospital, Bangalore and other private hospitals at various places. The petitioner underwent operation to his right hand and leg in three places and steel plates and screws were inserted to his leg and hand. The petitioner spent more than Rs.4,00,000/- towards transportation, medical, attendant and extra nourishment. The petitioner took treatment as inpatient for a period of more than three (03) months. Till the date of filing of the petition, he is taking treatment as out-patient. The petitioner requires future treatment for his leg and hand. The Doctors 5 MACMA NO. 302 OF 2022 VS,J. expressed that even after the treatment there will be no chance of recovery and he should be confined to bed throughout his life. ii. The petitioner was quite hale and healthy person prior to the accident and he was aged 32 years only at the time of accident. The petitioner was working as Zonal Manager for Ananthapur and Kurnool Districts in Mc. Dowell's Private Limited, Hyderabad and he was earning Rs.12,000/- per month towards his salary. Due to the accident, the petitioner became permanently disabled person and he has got 55% disability. The petitioner is not in a position to do any work and suffering a lot and depending on others. iii. Said accident was registered as a case in Cr.No.85/2015 of Kanaganapalli Police station under Sections 337 and 338 IPC. Respondent No.1 is the driver, respondent No.2 is owner and respondent No.3 is the insurer of the crime vehicle i.e., car bearing No.AP 21 AH 3063. Hence, Respondents No. 1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the petitioner, along with interest and costs. 4. Respondents No.1 and 2 were set ex parte and remained ex-parte. 5. Respondent No.3 - insurance company filed its written statement denying the averments of the claim petition including the manner of accident, nature of injuries sustained by petitioner, treatment taken, expenditure incurred 6 MACMA NO. 302 OF 2022 VS,J. and the disability sustained by him. It further denied its liability contending that he petitioner has sustained only simple injuries and took treatment in Government General Hospital, Ananthapuramu under Arogya Sree scheme and the question of spending huge amount does not arise. The petition should be dismissed for non-joinder of insurer and owner of the motorcycle bearing No.AP 21 AA 8740 who will speak real facts of the case. The accident has occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the rider of motorcycle but not due to the negligent act of the car bearing No.A 21 AH 3063. At the time of accident, there were three persons preceded on the motorcycle. The rider of the motorcycle drove the same in a rash and negligent manner, with high speed and lost control over the same and dashed against the car which was proceeding on the extreme left side of the road. Hence, the accident occurred due to the negligent act of the motorcycle bearing No.AP 21 AA 8740 only. There is contributory negligence on the part of the rider of motorcycle bearing No.AP 21 AA 8740 proceeding with three persons and contributed his rash and negligence in causing the accident. At the time of accident, the petitioner was having no valid driving licence. At the time of accident, the car driver did not possess valid and effective driving licence to drive the car bearing No.AP 21 AH 3063 and hence the respondent No.3 is not at all liable to pay any kind of compensation. The compensation claimed by the petitioner is highly excessive, exaggerated and out of proportion. There is no disability to the petitioner. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition. 7 MACMA NO. 302 OF 2022 VS,J. 6. Basing on the above pleadings, the following issues have been settled for trial by the Tribunal. 1) Whether the accident that occurred on 22.09.2013 at about 4.00 p.m., at Puttakanuma forest, Kanaganapalli Mandal, Kalyandurg-Dharmavaram was due to the rash and negligent driving of the first respondent in driving car bearing No.AP 21 AB 3063? 2) Whether the petitioner suffered injuries in the said accident? 3) Whether the petitioner became permanently disabled because of the said injuries? 4) Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation, if so, what is the quantum of compensation and from whom? 5) To what relief? 7. To prove the case of petitioner, petitioner himself was examined as PW.1 and got marked Ex.A.1 – attested copy of F.I.R., Ex.A.2 – attested copy of wound certificate; Ex.A.3 – attested copy of charge sheet, ex.A.4 – original disability certificate issued by medical Board, Ananthapuramu, Ex.A.5 – Original discharge summary (2 in numbers), Ex.A.6 – Medical bills for Rs.5,52,930/- (115 in number), Ex.A.7 – salary certificate issued by Prayag Enterprises Pvt., Ltd., Hyderabad, Ex.A.8 – Motor repair bills issued by Venky Motors, Kothacheruvu, Ex.A.9 – Transport bills for Rs.1,55,200/- (20 in Number) and Ex.a.10 – X-Rays 95 in number). He also examined Dr.A. Jagannath, who has issued 8 MACMA NO. 302 OF 2022 VS,J. Ex.A4/disability certificate as P.W.2, Dr.Narendra, Plastic Surgeon, St. John's Medical College Hospital, Bangalore, as P.W.3, Lawrence Oliver, Billing Superintendent in St.John's Medical College Hospital, Bangalore as P.W.4 and M. Raghuram Reddy, Manager (Personal and Admin), in Prayag Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. as P.W.5 respectively and marked Ex.C.1 to Ex.C.4 – case sheets through P.W.3. On behalf of Respondent No.3 none were examined, except marking Ex.B.1/insurance policy, with consent. 8. The tribunal after hearing learned counsel for both sides, perusing the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence and legal authorities submitted on behalf the petitioner, allowed the claim petition partly by awarding compensation of Rs.9,46,631/- to the petitioner with interest at 9% p.a from the date of petition till the date of realization, directing respondents No.1 to 3 jointly and severally to pay compensation amount to the petitioner within two (02) months from the date of order, together with interest and proportionate costs. 9. Being aggrieved by the said Award the claimant has preferred the present appeal on the ground that the tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.9,46,631/- as against the claim of Rs.18,00,000/- for the permanent disability sustained by the appellant due to the injuries received by him in a motor vehicle accident. 9 MACMA NO. 302 OF 2022 VS,J. 10. Having heard the submissions made by the learned counsel representing both parties and on perusal of the material available on record, the point that arises for consideration is as follows: Whether the order of the Tribunal needs any interference? 11. On perusal of the award, it can be observed that the appellant – claimant got examined himself as P.W.1. In support of his case, he got marked Exs.A.1 to A.10. During evidence, P.W.1 categorically deposed that on 22.09.2015 himself and another were proceeding in a motorcycle bearing No.AP 21 AA 8740 from Ammavaripalli to Kalyandurg, when they reached Puttakanuma Forest at about 04.00 p.m., car bearing No.AP 21 AH 3063 came in opposite direction driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner with high speed, lost control over the same and dashed against the motorcycle in which P.W.1 and another were proceeding, as a result of which, he sustained fracture of right thigh, fracture of right knee, grievous injury to right arm, grievous injury to right elbow, grievous injury to right forearm and other parts of the body. Considering the evidence of P.W.1 coupled with Ex.A.1 – copy of F.I.R., Ex.A.2 – copy of charge sheet, the Tribunal held that the accident has occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of car bearing No.AP 21 AH 3063 by its driver i.e. respondent No.1. 10 MACMA NO. 302 OF 2022 VS,J. 12. In support of his case, the claimant got examined P.Ws.2 and 3. P.W.2 is the Doctor and one of the members of the Medical board, who issued Ex.A.4 disability certificate and P.W.3 – Doctor, who performed plastic surgery on the injuries sustained by the claimant in the said accident. As per Ex.A.4, the Medical Board assessed the permanent disability sustained by the claimant as 55%. The same was supported by the evidence of P.W.2-Doctor, who is one of the members in the medical board. 13. P.W.1 also got examined P.W.4, who is working as Billing Superintendent in St. John’s Medical College Hospital, where the petitioner got treatment immediately after the accident. P.W.1 also got examined P.W.5, who is the Manager in Prayag Enterprises Private Limited, where the petitioner was employed. P.W.5 deposed that the claimant was working as Marketing Executive in Prayag Enterprises Private Limited, Hyderabad and was drawing Rs.10,147/- per month towards his net salary. Ex.A.7 is the salary certificate issued by Prayag Enterprises Private Limited shows that the petitioner was drawing Rs.10,147/- per month towards his net salary and Rs.11,000/- as gross salary. 14. In spite of Ex.A.4 disability certificate shows that the claimant sustained 55% disability, which is supported by the evidence of P.W.2, who is one of the members in the medical board, the Tribunal re-assessed the permanent disability to the extent of 9.075%. 11 MACMA NO. 302 OF 2022 VS,J. 15. Under similar circumstances, the Hon’ble Apex Court in “Prakash Chand Sharma Vs. Rambabu Saini1” has held that when disability certificate was issued by the Medical Board and one of the members of the Medical Board is examined as witness to prove the disability certificate, the Tribunal cannot reassess the disability. In view of the same, this Court is of the opinion that the Tribunal ought not to have reassessed the disability as 9.075% instead of 55% as mentioned in Ex.A.4 disability certificate issued by the Medical Board. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the claimant has suffered 55% disability taking into consideration Ex.A.4 disability certificate. 16. As stated above, considering the evidence of P.W.5 and Ex.A.7 the Tribunal taken the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.10,147/-. Accordingly, annual income of the claimant would come to (Rs.10,147 X 12) Rs.1,21,764/-. After applying the appropriate multiplier i.e. 16 for the age group of 31 to 35 years, as per the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in “Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation2”, the loss of earnings would come to (Rs.1,21,764 X 16) Rs.19,48,224/-. Therefore, the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.10,71,523/- (Rs.19,48,224 X 55%) for loss of disability. 17. Further, the Tribunal held that the claimant is entitled for compensation towards loss of earnings for a period of 6 months (Rs.10,147 X 6) 1 2025 Supreme (SC) 305 2 2009 ACJ 1298 12 MACMA NO. 302 OF 2022 VS,J. as he did not attend for work for a period of 6 months, but grossly erred (paragraph No.11 (d) of the Award passed by the Tribunal) in awarding compensation of Rs.81,176/- (Rs.10,147 X 8) towards loss of earnings for a period of 8 months. Considering that the petitioner did not attend the work because of the injuries sustained by him, this Court is of the opinion that the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.60,882/- towards loss of earnings for a period of 6 months. 18. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- towards compensation for shock, pain and suffering, Rs.15,000/- towards extra nourishment, Rs.4,52,930/- towards medical bills, which needs no interference. 19. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal under different heads and the amounts enhanced by this Court, are as follows: Sl. No. Head of the claim Compensation awarded by the Tribunal in Rs. Ps. Amounts now awarded by this Court Rs. Ps. 1. Towards shock, pain and suffering 1,50,000-00 1,50,000-00 2. Towards Extra nourishment 15,000-00 15,000-00 3. Towards Medical bills 4,52,930-00 4,52,930-00 4. Loss of earnings for six months 81,176-00 60,882-00 5. Disability @ 9.075% = 2,47,525-00 @55% = 10,71,523-00 Total 9,46,631-00 17,50,335-00 20. In all, the appellant - claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.17,50,335/- towards compensation for the injuries sustained by him. 13 MACMA NO. 302 OF 2022 VS,J. 21. Accordingly, the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.9,46,631/- to Rs.17,50,335/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of realization as awarded by the Tribunal. The same shall be deposited before the Tribunal within a period of three (03) months and the Tribunal shall disburse 50% of the amount in favour of the claimant and the rest of the amount shall be deposited in a Nationalized bank for a period of three (03) years. It is made clear that if the earlier awarded sum has been deposited, the differential sum shall be deposited within the stipulated time as mentioned hereinabove and the disbursement shall take place accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA KS Dated 03.03.2026. 14 MACMA NO. 302 OF 2022 VS,J. 248 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 302/2022 DATED 03.03.2026 KS