JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal is preferred by the Appellant/APSRTC, challenging the award dated 08.01.2018 passed in M.V.O.P.No.591/2016 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Prl.District Judge, Nellore, wherein the Tribunal while allowing the petition, awarded compensation of Rs.20,00,000/-with interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition, till the date of realisation to the petitioners/claimants, for the death of Padarthi Rathnam, in a motor vehicle accident.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are arrayed as parties before the tribunal.

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.20,00,000/-on account of the death of Padarthi Rathnam, who is the father of the petitioners No.1 to 4, in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 25.04.2016.

4. The facts show that the deceased Padarthi Rathnam was aged 56 years, worked as Driver in APSRTC Kavali Depot. His wife predeceased him. He used to earn Rs.30,000/-per month and contributing the same to the petitioners. On 25.04.2016 at about 10.30 p.m. on completion of duty in APSRTC Kavali Depot, deceased boarded bus No.AP 26Z 0176 of 1st respondent in order to go to Rajupalem, and at about 11.00 p.m., the said bus reached opposite Babul Reddy Dhaba at Gowravaram Village on National High Way No.5, and at that time, the 2nd respondent drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner, at high speed, and hit the bus on rear side of a stationed lorry bearing No.AP 16 TY 8148, and as a result, the deceased sustained severe bleeding injuries, apart from one passenger by name Paddiga Venkatesh died instantaneously on the spot. The said accident was reported in Kavali Rural Police Station and a case in Cr.No.84/2016 was registered against the 2nd respondent. The accident resulting the death of deceased took place, due to rash and negligent act of the 2nd respondent/driver in driving the bus of 1st respondent/APSRTC, during the course of his employment and thus, both the respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation amount to the petitioners.

5. Before, the Tribunal, the 1strespondent/APSRTC filed written statement, while traversing the material averments with regard to proof of age, avocation, monthly earnings of the deceased, manner of accident, rash and negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle, liability to pay compensation, and contended that at the time of accident, the offending bus bearing No.AP 26Z 0176 was operating from Vijayawada to Nellore, and at about 11.00 p.m. reached opposite Babul Reddy Dhaba at Gowravaram Village, and at that time, lorry bearing No.AP 16 TY 8148 was stationed on left side of metal road, without placing boulders and indicators, and at the same time, there was a burst in front left side tyre of the bus No.AP 26Z 0176 of the 1st respondent, and due to that the accident took place, and there is no rash and negligence of the 2nd respondent in taking place of the accident, and the owner and insurer of lorry bearing No.AP 16 TY 8148 are necessary parties to the claim petition. The 2ndrespondent adopted the written statement of the 1st respondent.

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

1. Whether the deceased Padarthi Rathnam, S/o.Aseervadam died in the accident occurred on 25.04.2016 due to rash and negligent driving of driver/R-2 of RC Bus bearing No.AP 26Z 0176?

2. Whether the insurer and insurer of lorry bearing No.AP 16 TY 8148 are proper and necessary parties to the petition?

3. Whether the petitioners are entitled to any compensation? If so, to what amount and against whom?

4. To what relief?

7. To substantiate their claim, the petitioners examined P.Ws-1 to 3and got marked Exs.A-1 to A-4. On behalf of the2ndrespondent, R.W-1 was examined and Exs.X-1 to X-3were marked.

8. The Tribunal, taking into consideration the evidence of P.Ws-1t