JUDGMENT :

B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI, J.

1. This appeal is preferred by the Appellant/Insurance Company, challenging the award dated 01.05.2015 passed in M.V.O.P. No. 9/2013 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-X Addl. District Judge, Piler, wherein the Tribunal while allowing the petition, awarded compensation of Rs. 9,10,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of petition, till the date of realisation to the petitioners/claimants, for the death of M. Diwakar Reddy, in a motor vehicle 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. 5,00,000/- on account of the death of M. Diwakar Reddy, who is husband of the 1st petitioner, and father of the petitioners No. 2 and 3 in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 02.10.2010.

4. The facts show that on 02.10.2010 the deceased M. Diwakar Reddy had gone to Marripadu village on his Bajaj CT motor cycle bearing No. AP-03H-9854 along with one Patan Syed Valli to purchase paddy. After completion of transaction, when they were returning, at about 08.00 p.m. an Ape Luggage Auto bearing No. AP-03X-9141 came in opposite direction, being driven in a rash and negligent manner, collided against the motor cycle, resulting in Diwakar Reddy falling down from the vehicle and sustained grievous injuries to his right hand, leg and on his head, and died while he was being shifted to Tirupati for better treatment on the advice of doctors of Vayalpad. The said accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of auto driver. A case was registered in Cr. No. 75/2010 for the offence punishable U/s. 304-A of Indian Penal Code against the driver of said auto. Due to sudden demise of the deceased, the petitioners lost their sole bread winner.

5. Before, the Tribunal, the 1st respondent/driver of auto filed counter denying the averments of the petition, contended that there was no negligence on the part of driver of auto, and the accident was occurred due to negligence of rider of the motor cycle, and that the auto is insured with the second respondent and the second respondent is liable to pay compensation.

6. The 2nd respondent/Insurance Company filed counter resisting, 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, and liability to pay compensation, contended that the driver of auto did not possess effective and valid driving license at the time of accident, and that the 1st respondent had paid a sum of Rs. 500/- towards fine for engaging an unlicensed person to drive the vehicle, and that the 1st respondent had wilfully violated the terms and conditions of the policy, therefore, the 2nd respondent is not liable to pay compensation.

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

1. Whether the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of Ape luggage auto bearing No. AP-03X-9141 which resulted in death of the deceased by name Mallela Diwakar Reddy?

2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, by whom and to what amount?

3. To what relief?

8. To substantiate their claim, the petitioners examined PWs. 1 and 2 and got marked Exs.A-1 to A-6. The 1st respondent was examined as RW-1 and the 2nd respondent was examined as RW-2 and got marked Ex.B-1.

9. The Tribunal, taking into consideration the evidence of PWs. 1 and 2, coupled with Exs.A-1 to A-6, held that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the ape luggage auto driver, and further, taking into consideration the evidence of PWs. 1 and 2, corroborated by Exs.A-1 to A-6, awarded a compensation of Rs. 9,10,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of petition, till the date