JUDGMENT :

This appeal is preferred by the petitioner/claimant, challenging the award dated 09.08.2016 passed in M.V.O.P.No.122/2012 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-VIII Addl. District Judge, Chittoor, wherein the Tribunal while partly allowing the petition, awarded compensation of Rs.3,78,227/-with interest @ 7.5% p.a., from the date of petition, till the date of deposit, for the injuries sustained by the petitioner in a motor accident.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are arrayed as parties in the lower Court.

3. As seen from the record, originally the petitioners filed an application U/s.166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for brevity “the Act”) claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-on account of the injuries sustained by the petitioner in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 02/03.04.2011 at about 12.00 mid night.

4. The facts show that on the intervening night of 02/03.04.2011 at about 12.00 mid night the petitioner and his father went to Chittoor Town to purchase tablets for his mother. The petitioner was the pillion rider and when they reached near VSR Engineering Works on Puttur-Chittor road, a rally with scooters came from Chittoor Town in view of the Indian Cricket Team having had won the world cup in a cricket match and that the 1st respondent being the driver of the crime vehicle, drove the same in a rash and negligent manner, and dashed the two wheeler of the petitioner, and as a result, the petitioner fell down and sustained injuries on his left eye, left hand, and he was shifted to a Govt. Hospital, Chittoor, and from there he was shifted to CMC Hospital, Vellore, and from there to MIOT Hospital, Chennai. The petitioner incurred huge expenses towards treatment and medicines. A case was registered in Cr.No.31/2011 by SHO, Traffic P.S., Chittoor against the driver of the crime vehicle. Subsequently, another injured Pavan Kumar died and the section of law was altered to 304-A and 338 of Indian Penal Code. Due to injuries, the petitioner became a disabled person. Prior to the accident, the petitioner was hale and healthy and due to the accident, he suffered with a severe pain.

5. Before the Tribunal, the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company filed written statement resisting, while traversing the material averments with regard to proof of age, avocation, monthly earnings of the petitioner, manner of accident, rash and negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle, nature of injuries, alleged permanent disability, medical expenditure, and liability to pay compensation to the petitioner, and contended that the petitioner fabricated the medical bills to claim compensation. The driver of the crime vehicle had no valid driving license at the time of accident. The claim of the petitioner is very high and excessive. The 1st respondent/driver of crime vehicle remained exparte.

6. On the strength of the pleadings of both parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues :

1. Whether the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the Bolero bearing No.AP 03 AN 0767?

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from whom?

3. To what relief?

7. To substantiate their claim, the petitioner got examined P.Ws-1 to 4 and got marked Exs.A-1 to A-16 and Exs.X-1 and X-2. On behalf of the 2nd respondent, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced.

8. The Tribunal, taking into consideration the evidence of P.Ws-1 to 4, coupled with Exs.A-1 to A-16 and Exs.X-1 and X-2, held that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the 1st respondent/driver of the Bolero bearing No.AP 03 AN 0767, and further, taking into consideration of the evidence of P.Ws-1 to 4 corroborated by Exs.A-1 to A-16 and Exs.X-1 and X-2, awarded a sum of Rs.3,78,227/-with interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition, till the date of deposit.

9. The plea of the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company is that the petitioner fabricated the medical bills to claim compens