JUDGMENT :

This appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘M.V.Act’) has been filed by the Oriental Insurance Company Limited challenging the judgment and award dt.31.08.2005 delivered by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Vizianagaram in M.V.O.P.691 of 2002 granting compensation of a sum of Rs.78,000/- along with interest @ 9% per annum thereon from the date of presentation of the claim till the date of realization of the amount, to the claimant/petitioner on account of the injuries sustained by the claimant in the road accident occurred on 25.05.2002 at Nathavalasa, Vizianagaram District.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are arrayed before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”).

3. The factual context of the case is as under:

(a) On 25.05.2002 at about 10.30 p.m., the petitioner boarded a lorry bearing registration No. AP 16 X 2697 at Pendurthi Village to go to Palasa. On the way when the lorry reached a place near Nathavalasa, the 1st respondent/driver drove the lorry at a high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the stationed lorry from behind as a result, the petitioner sustained injuries on his right leg, right knee, left leg and all parts of his body. He was admitted in Government Hospital, Vizianagaram and was treated as inpatient for three days. Later he took treatment in a private hospital at Pendurthi and he suffered permanent disability and suffered loss of earnings. The matter was reported to the Police alleging that the accident took place as a result of rash and negligent driving of the said lorry and based on the F.I.R lodged by the petitioner, a case in Cr.No.50 of 2002 was registered under Section 337 IPC and after investigation of the case, charge sheet was submitted against the accused driver of the lorry(1st respondent) for having committed offence punishable under Section 338 IPC. Petitioner filed application claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Vizianagaram on account of his injuries in the said road accident, as mentioned below:

(b) Respondents 1 and 2 did not contest the matter. The 3rd respondent/Insurance Company filed written statement denying the case of the petitioner. It is pleaded that the petitioner is put to strict proof of the same that the 1st respondent held valid driving licence to drive the lorry and that the vehicle had necessary permit and vehicular documents and was duly insured with the 3rd respondent at the time of accident. It is further pleaded that the petitioner is also put to strict proof that there were no violations of terms and conditions of the policy and permit. It is further pleaded that the petitioner travelled in a lorry to go to Palasa and he was an unauthorized and gratuitous passenger. The policy, if any, does not cover the risk of such passenger. The petitioner is not entitled to claim compensation and further pleaded that the compensation claimed is high and excessive and the petition may be dismissed.

(c) In view of the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues:

(1) Whether the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry bearing No. AP 16 X 2697?

(2) Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation?

(3) Whether the respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay any compensation?

(4) To what relief?

(d) In order to establish the claim of the petitioner, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.7 and X.1 & X.2 were mar