E VIJAYAKUMAR RAO Vs. A SATYANARYANA RAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question for consideration in this appeal is with regard to the compensation payable in respect of fracture of 9 ribs of the appellant in an accident which occured on 24-8-1978. Incidentally, the question also arises whether there was negligence on the part of the respondent's driver.

(2.) THE appellant claimed a total sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- as damages which included Rs. 25,000/for loss of earnings on account of the absence of the appellant at his works, Rs. 25,000/- for other items and a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (one lakh) as general damages for pain and suffering and other losses due to the injuries.

(3.) THE accident occurred at 2. 00 p. m. while the claimant along with his father and his friend, P. W. 3, were proceeding in a diesel jeep from Warangal to Hyderabad. The respondent's lorry loaded with sand and drivan by R. W. 2 collided with the appellant's jeep. The appellant's father died and the appellant was seriously injured. As a result of the accident, nine ribs out of 12, were fractured and it is claimed, the entire physical activity of the appellant came to a stand-still. He could not attend to his works at the site of the contracts or in the lands, in respect of his agriculture. The appellant also suffered severe pain and agony and had to undergo expert treatment at various place at Warangal, Hyderabad and Madras incurring huge expenditure. The respondent denied that there was negligence and also disputed the quantum of damages. The Court below came to the conclusion that negligence was not established and that even if it was established. only a sum of Rs. 15,000/- was payable towards damage to the jeep instead of Rs. 35,000/- as claimed. The claim for Rs. 8,000/- towards loss in agriculture was disallowed and only a sum of Rs. 10,000/- was held to be reasonable towards pain and suffering. He also mentioned that another sum of Rs. 5,000/- was payable towards pain and suffering and Rs. 3,000/- towards loss of contract works. It is now concedes that the lorry is insured only with 4th respondent Insurance Company.