Abdul Khaled , Abdul Khalek vs Mohammed Sab And Another on 2 July, 2026

    0
    7
    ADVERTISEMENT

    The present appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant

    against the Judgment and decree dated 22.10.2017 in

    SPONSORED

    O.P.No.1424 of 2006 passed by the learned VII Additional

    Metropolitan Sessions Judge – cum – Additional Chief Judge,

    Hyderabad, (for short, ‘the learned Tribunal’) seeking

    enhancement of the compensation awarded by the learned

    Tribunal.

    2. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter are

    referred to as they were arrayed before the learned Tribunal.

    BRIEF FACTS:

    3. The brief facts of the case as can be seen from the record

    are that on 21.01.2006 at about 9.00 a.m., the claimant was

    proceeding towards Balkpur village on his cycle along with

    VRKR,J
    MACMA_5189_2008

    Guava fruits for selling the same to the customers. When he

    reached near Gopanpally gate, a lorry bearing registration

    No.ATS 6957 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the offending vehicle’)

    belonging to respondent No.1 came in rash and negligent

    manner and hit the cycle of the claimant, as a result, he fell

    down and sustained multiple injuries and fractures. The

    claimant was shifted to Osmania Government Hospital, wherein

    he was admitted as inpatient from 21.01.2006 to 15.03.2006.

    Skin grafting was done on the left knee and he was discharged

    on 15.03.2006. The claimant alleged to have spent an amount

    of Rs.25,000/-towards extra nourishment, medicines and

    attendant charges and he was earning Rs.4,500/- per month

    and on account of the fracture on the left hip and compound

    fractures of the left leg, he is not able to walk, sit, squat or

    climb the stairs and he lost his earning capacity. Based on the

    information received, the Police Karankote registered a case in

    Cr.No.9 of 2006 under section 337 of the IPC against the driver

    of the offending vehicle and after completion of investigation

    charge sheet was laid. Since the offending vehicle belongs to

    respondent No.1 and insured with respondent No.2, the

    claimant sought compensation of Rs.5,50,000/-.



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here