SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(AP) 690

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO, J.
National Insurance Company Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Sake Ganganna 12 Others - Respondent
M.A.C.M.A. No.2826 of 2013
Decided on : 21-10-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : T S RAYALU
For the Respondent: M KARIBASAIAH

The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, including the factors to be considered in calculating the compensation amount.

Headnote:

Motor Vehicles Act - Compensation - Sections 140, 166 - The court discussed the circumstances of the accident, contributory negligence, and the determination of compensation. It highlighted the legal provisions related to the calculation of compensation, including the deceased's income, funeral expenses, loss of estate, and filial consortium.

Fact of the Case:

The claimant sought compensation for the death of their son in a motor accident. The court found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry driver and awarded compensation of Rs.5,15,000 to the claimants.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the accident was caused by the negligence of the lorry driver and upheld the compensation awarded by the tribunal.

Issues: The main issue was whether the accident occurred due to rash and negligence of the driver of the crime vehicle and the tribunal fixed a just and reasonable compensation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the evidence provided by witnesses and the postmortem examination report to determine the cause of the accident and calculate the compensation.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the order passed by the tribunal was confirmed.

JUDGMENT:

1. Aggrieved by the order dated 21.01.2013 in M.V.O.P. No.217 of 2011 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, Anantapur (for short ‘the Tribunal’), the 2nd respondent/National Insurance Company Limited represented by its Divisional Manager, Anantapur, has preferred this appeal questioning the award of compensation an amount of Rs.5,15,000/- by the tribunal with proportionate costs and interest.

2. For convenience, the parties will hereinafter be referred to as they were arrayed in the M.V. O.P.

3. The claimant has filed the claim petition under Sections 140 and 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to grant compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- for the death of Sake Vengamuni (hereinafter referred to as ‘the deceased’), who is the son of the claimant No.1 and 2 and brother of claimant No.3 and 4, in a motor accident that occurred on 28.08.2010 at about 00:30 hours, during night time while the deceased was travelling as a Cleaner in the DCM Van bearing No. AP 31 TT 6365, at the out outskirts of Addakal Village on N.H.7 road in Mahaboob Nagar District, one lorry bearing No. AP 16 TV 0588 (herein after referred to as ‘crime vehicle’) which was going ahead was suddenly stopped on the middle of the road for picking up some passengers and luggage, the driver of the lorry has not applied any signals while stopping the lorry suddenly in midst of the road without giving any indicators, as a result of which, the DCM Van dashed against the lorry, thereby the deceased sustained grievous injuries all over the body and he was shifted to G.G.H., Mahaboobnagar and succumbed to death while undergoing treatment.

4. The respondents No.1, 4 to 9 have remained ex-parte. The 2nd respondent has filed its written statement contending that there is no rashness and negligence on the part of the driver of the lorry bearing No. AP 16 TV 0588 and the accident had occurred only due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the DCM van and it is obvious in the criminal records and in the claim petition also and the petitioner has to establish that the crime vehicle was insured with the 2nd respondent and the 2nd respondent does not admit the age, avocation and income of the deceased.

5. The 10th respondent has filed its counter by submitting that the alleged ghastly mishap occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry belonging to the 1st respondent but not due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the DCM van and therefore, the driver of the crime lorry is alone responsible for the accident.

6. Based on the pleadings the tribunal has framed appropriate issues. During the trial, on behalf of the claimants P.Ws.1 to 4 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.8 besides Exs.X.1 to X.3 were marked. On behalf of the 2nd respondent, no oral evidence was adduced, however, Ex.B.1-policy was marked. On behalf of 10th respondent, RW-1 was examined and Ex.B.2 to B.10 were marked. After considering the material evidence on record, the tribunal has held that the deceased died while travelling in the DCM Van due to rashness and negligence on the part of the driver of the Lorry and the respondents No.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation of Rs.5,15,000/- to the claimants with interest @ 7.5% per annum and the claim is dismissed against the R-3 to R-10 without costs.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent, and the learned counsel for the claimants.

8. It is contended by the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent that the tribunal ought to have held that it is a clear case of contributory negligence and the driver of DCM van is equally responsible for occurrence of the accident and the tribunal erred in adopting Rs.60,000/- as the annual income of the deceased and also in awarding a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards loss of love and affection.

9. Learned counsel for the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top