M. VENKATESWARLU NAIDU Vs. SRIRAO SATYANARAYANA, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REP. BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER AND V. PARTHASARATHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE injured -claimant filed this appeal, having been aggrieved by the Order/Award of the learned Chairman of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal -cum -District Judge, Hyderabad, (for short, 'Tribunal') in M.V.O.P. No. 956 of 1997 dated 07.07.2001, awarding compensation of Rs. 1,19,914/ - (Rupees one lakh nineteen thousand nine hundred and fourteen only) as against the claim of Rs. 4,00,000/ - (Rupees four lakh only), for enhancement of compensation as prayed for in the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act'). Heard Sri M. Raja Malla Reddy, the learned counsel for appellant, Sri Srinivasa Rao Vutla, the learned standing counsel for 3rd respondent -United India Insurance Company Limited and Sri M. Rajender Reddy, the learned counsel for 2nd respondent -owner of the crime vehicle. 1st respondent -driver, who was served with notice called absent with no representation. Taken as heard the 1st respondent for his absence to decide on merits and perused the record. The parties hereinafter are referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience in the appeal.

(2.) THE contentions in the grounds of appeal in nutshell are that the award of the Tribunal is contrary to law, weight of evidence and probabilities of the case, that the Tribunal was erred in arriving a wrong conclusion on the quantum of compensation and awarded a very meager amount instead of awarding as claimed and prayed for from the nature of the injuries proved sustained, pain and sufferance there from and treatment undergone, amount incurred for the same and hence to allow the appeal by enhancing and awarding full compensation as prayed for.

(3.) THE facts of the case as proved before the Tribunal and not in dispute in this appeal are that, on 12.08.1997 due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the crime vehicle (lorry bearing No. AP 20 T 1890) belongs to the 2nd respondent insured with the 3rd respondent covered by Ex. B.1 policy, dashed the claimant by name Nalluri Kotaiah S/o. Venkaiah, aged 44 years, Agriculturist by avocation while he was proceeding on foot, as a result he sustained multiple injuries all over the body and crush injury on left leg up to thigh from toe that resulted in amputation and the right leg was also crushed at ankle (as per Exs. A.3 and A.4 medical certificates), which occurrence is covered by Ex. A.1 First Information Report in Cr. No. 27 of 1997 under Section 338 IPC and Ex. A.2 charge sheet. As per the evidence of claimant - P.W.1, he spent Rs. 1,00,000/ - (Rupees one lakh only) for treatment and filed Exs. A11 to A.116 bunch of bills for Rs. 75,000/ - (Rupees seventy five thousand only). However, the learned Chairman of the Tribunal, having found said injuries sustained by the P.W.1 described in Exs. A.3 and Ex. A.4 grievous in nature, and 80% permanent disability (as per Ex. A.119), simply awarded in all compensation of Rs. 1,98,914/ - (Rupees one lakh ninety eight thousand nine hundred and fourteen only) against respondent Nos. 1 to 3 jointly.