JUDGMENT :

This appeal is preferred by the Appellant/claimant, challenging the award dated 04.04.2017 passed in M.V.O.P.No.360/2013 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Addl.District Judge, Guntur, (for short ‘the Tribunal’), wherein the Tribunal while partly allowing the petition, awarded a compensation of Rs.9,43,000/-with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition, till the date of realisation, for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as parties in the M.V.O.P.

3. As seen from the record, originally the petitioner filed an application U/s.140 and 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for brevity “the Act”) claiming a compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-on account of the injuries and disability sustained by the petitioner in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 15.03.2013.

4. The facts show that on 15.03.2013 at about 07.30 p.m. while the claimant was waiting to board a vehicle at Kistaram Centre on State High Way, B.T.Road, at that time, one Tipper bearing No.AP 20 TA 7524 coming from Sathupalli towards Khammam driver by the 3rd respondent in a rash and negligent manner with high speed without blowing horn and without following the traffic rules, hit the petitioner, as a result, the petitioner sustained fractures to his both legs and other injuries all over the body and the injured was shifted to Government General Hospital, Guntur, where his both legs were amputated upto knee. The accident was reported to Sathupalli P.S. and the same was registered as a case in Cr.No.89/2013 for the offence punishable U/s.338 of Indian Penal Code against the driver of the said tipper. The petitioner was aged about 35 years, hale and healthy and he used to work as a mason mastry earning Rs.450/-per day. Due to the accident, the petitioner received severe fracture injuries and became a disabled person, in addition to mental agony and suffering besides losing his earning capacity.

5. Before the Tribunal, the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company, filed a written statement, while traversing the material averments with regard to the manner of accident, rash and negligence on the part of the driver of the crime vehicle, nature of injuries, medical expenditure, avocation and monthly earnings of the injured, alleged permanent disability, and liability to pay compensation, and contended that the said vehicle is not involved in the accident and that there is no negligence on the part of driver of the tipper, and that the 1st respondent handed over the said vehicle to the driver, who was not having an effective driving license, as such, the 1st respondent violated the policy conditions. Hence, the 2nd respondent is not liable to pay any compensation to the petitioner. The alleged amputation was not due to the injuries sustained in the accident and only due to non-obtaining of proper medical care and treatment and as such, the respondent is not liable to pay compensation for the said injuries.

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 driver of the tipper bearing No.AP 20 TA 7524 and caused injuries to Bikyam China Venkateswarlu @ Venkateswarlu?

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

3. To what relief?

7. To substantiate his claim, the petitioner examined P.Ws-1 to 3 and got marked Exs.A-1 to A-5 and Ex.X-1. On behalf of the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced.

8. The Tribunal, taking into consideration the evidence of P.Ws-1 to 3, coupled with Exs.A-1 to A-5 and Ex.X-1 held that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the tipper driver, and further taking into consideration the evidence of P.Ws-1 to 3 corroborated by Exs.A-1 to A-5 and Ex.X-1, awarded a compensation of Rs.9,43,000/-with interest @ 6% p.a. from the d