GOPIDI GANGA REDDY v. K.GANGA REDDY AND ANR
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: T.AMARNATH GOUD
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2020-03-06. GOPIDI GANGA REDDY v. K.GANGA REDDY AND ANR. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD M. A. C. M. A. NO: 2639 OF 2006 Appeal Under Section 173 of tr/. V. Act against the Order and decree made in O. P. No. 43/2004 dated 1211012006 on the file of the Court of the Chairman Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Cum lAdditional District Judge, Adilabad. Betwee n Gopidi Ganga Reddy, S/o. Seenaiah Agnculture Ri/o. Gundampali Village. Presently R/o'Ramnagar' Adilabad rown ... AppELLANT/pETrroNER AND 1. K. Ganga Reddy, S/o. Narsa Reddy, Age lvlajor Owner of Herohonda l\,4otor Cycle No. AP 1 C 7447 No. Gundampalli Village, Dilawarpur lVlandal, Adilabad District. 2. The New lndia Assurance Company Limited, Rep by its Branch Manager The Branch Manager, New lndia Assurance Company Limited, Branch Office:Nizamabad. ... RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: SRI S. SURENDER REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: SRI P.
HARINATH GUPTA The Court made the following: JUDGMENT THE IION'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. ANIARNA]'II C;OUD M. A. C. M. A. NO. 2639 0F 2006 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed by the claimant, aggrieved by the older and decree dated 12. 10. 2006 in O. P. No. 43 of 2004 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tlibunal-cum-I Additional District Jucge, 1\dilabad (for short 'the tribunal), seeking enhancement of the compersation amount on the ground that the lribunal has not considered the fractr- re injury received by him on the left shoulder 2. After considering the oral and documentary eviderrce on record, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 20,0001 towards pain and suffering and Rs. 1,0001 towarcls rnedical expenses. Thus, the Tribunal awzrrded a sum of Rs. 21,000/-. The claimant seeking compensation amount ,rn the ground that he received fracture injury, but no medical evidence is prc,duced to that effect.
Therefore, the order passed by the tribunal is we ll considered and needs no interference by this Court and hence, the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 3. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand dismissed. SD/. N. CHA\DFIA SEKHAR RAO ASSIST,qNTREGISTRAR //rRUE copytt 4+ SECTION OFFICER To, '1 . The Chairman I\4ACT cum - | - Additional District Jucige, at Adilabad (with records if any) 2. One CC to SRt S. SURENDER REDDY, Advocate tOpUCl ' 3. One CC to SRt P. HARTNATH GUpTA, Advocate 1OeUC1 4. Two CD Copies TL IVP HIGH COURT DATED:0610312020 s'rAr6 '1 k{E ,t :l z I'itll 2S20 2 I a * C;gpprC JUDGMENT MACMA. No. 2635l of 2006 DISMISSING THE M. A. C. M. A. WITHOUT COSTS. f #
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.