1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the claimants in OP No.41 of 2003 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Court, Kurnol, wherein and where under, a claim for an amount of Rs.11.00 lakhs as compensation for the death of Banda Nagamalleswara Rao was denied.

2. First appellant is the wife and appellants 2 and 3 are the children of the deceased. According to them, on 31.01.1999 at about 7.00 PM, the deceased was driving his motorcycle bearing No. AP 04 A 4736 and was proceeding from Yemmiganur to Ananthapur. His brother B. Mallikarjuna was the pillion rider. It is stated that a lorry bearing No. AP.02T.6366, which was proceeding in front of their motorcycle, suddenly slowed down the speed by applying brakes. As a result of which, the motorcycle driven by the deceased dashed against the lorry from its back side. The deceased sustained head injury and died on the spot. P.W.2 who was the pillion rider also sustained grievous injuries. In connection with the said accident, a case in Cr.No.3 of 1999 was registered on the file of Pedda Vaduguru Police Station. The police after completion of investigation filed a charge sheet against the driver of the lorry. Ex.A.1 is the copy of the F.I.R and Ex.A.2 is the copy of the charge sheet. It may be noted that the FIR was registered against an unknown person as the lorry went away without stopping after the accident. According to the claimants, the deceased was aged about 32 years by the date of accident. He studied up to M.Com and was working in M.G. Brothers at Ananthapur, getting Rs.4,000/-per month as salary. Hence the claimants filed the claim petition seeking compensation to an extent of Rs11.00 lakhs from the respondents.

3. The claim against the first respondent who is the driver of the offending vehicle was dismissed as no batta was paid and the second respondent who is the owner of the said vehicle remained ex parte. The third respondent – Insurance company filed its written statement stating that the accident did not occur due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle but due to the negligent driving of the deceased himself in dashing against the lorry from its backside. It is further stated that the lorry did not involve in the accident at all. The owner and insurer of the motorcycle are also necessary parties to the petition. It is further stated in the written statement that the second respondent colluded with the claimants and he intentionally did not report the matter of accident to the third respondent. It is further stated that the amount of compensation claimed is excessive and exorbitant.

4. Basing on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues for trial:

i. Whether the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry bearing No.AP.02T.6366, resulting in the death of Banda Naga Malleswara Rao?

ii. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation and if so, to what amount and from which of the respondents?

5. In support of his case the claimants examined two witnesses as P.Ws.1 & 2 and marked Exs.A1 to A9. In support of the case of the contesting third respondent, a Senior Assistant in the office of the Insurance Company was examined as R.W.1 and EXs.B.1 to B.3 were marked. Ex.B.1 is the insurance policy, Ex.B.2 is the certified copy of judgment in C.C.No.59 of 1999 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Gooty and Ex.B.3 is the certified copy of deposition of P.W.1 in the said C.C.59 of 1999 i.e. P.W.2 herein.

6. P.W.1 is the wife of the deceased and she is not an eyewitness to the incident. P.W.2 who is the brother of the deceased was examined as an eyewitness. He deposed that on 31.01.1999 at about 7.00 PM himself and the deceased were proceeding on a motorcycle from Yemmiganur to Ananthapur. A lorry bearing No.AP.02T.6366 was going in front of their motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner at high speed. He furth