JUDGMENT :

This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short “the Act’) has been preferred by the appellant-claimant, challenging the Award dated 22.02.2006, in M.V.O.P.No.575 of 2003 delivered by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal –cum- V Additional District Judge, Kurnool at Nandyal (for short ‘the Tribunal’), granting compensation of Rs.2,05,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum thereon, from the date of the petition till the date of realization, to the petitioner-injured against the 1st & 2nd respondents jointly and severally, on account of the injuries sustained in a road traffic accident at Koilkuntla Town.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are arrayed before the Tribunal.

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

a) A 43-year-old Chinna Obaiahgari Mohan Reddy was a Commission Agent and landlord. At the time of the accident, the claimant was getting an annual income of more than Rs.1,00,000/-, as per the income tax returns filed before the Income Tax Department. On 27.02.2003 at about 3.00 p.m., while the petitioner was returning to his house on a motorcycle bearing No.AP 21 D 8729, after attending a function, and when he reached near the bus stand at Koilkuntla Town, the offending vehicle (Jeep) bearing No.AP 21 D 8999 belongs to the 1st respondent driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, and hit on the rear side of his motorcycle, as a result, the petitioner-claimant fell down and sustained a fracture of the left posterior i.e., left side of the hip. Immediately, he was shifted to Balaji Nursing Home, Kurnool for treatment. The matter was reported to the Police alleging that the accident took place as a result of rash and negligent driving of the said Jeep and based on the complaint lodged by the petitioner-claimant, Koilkuntla Police, registered a case in Crime No.16 of 2003 for the offence under Section 337 IPC and issued F.I.R and after completion of investigation of the case, a charge sheet was submitted against the accused driver for having committed an offence punishable under Section 338 IPC and Section 134 (a) & (b) read with 187 of M.V.Act and the claimant Ch.Mohan Reddy filed an application claiming compensation of a sum of Rs.4,75,000/-, but restricted the claim to Rs.3,00,000/- before the Tribunal, on account of the injuries sustained by him in the said road traffic accident.

b) The 1st respondent, who is the owner of the offending vehicle, did not contest the matter.

c) The 2nd respondent-Insurance Company filed a counter contending inter alia that the accident did not take place near the bus stand at Koilkuntla and it took place somewhere in Kurnool Town, due to the hit by an unidentified vehicle. It is further contended that the driver of the offending vehicle was not having a valid and effective driving licence at the time of the accident. It is further contended that the offending vehicle was not having a valid permit and violated the policy conditions. It is further contended that this respondent is not at all responsible for the alleged accident and is not liable to pay the compensation and prayed to dismiss the petition.

d) Based on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues:

1) Whether the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the jeep bearing No.AP 21 D 8999 resulting in injuries to the petitioner?

2) Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation? And if so, to what amount and from which of the respondents?

3) To what relief?

e) During the trial, in order to establish his claim, the injured-claimant was examined himself as P.W.1, Dr.B.V.Subba Reddy, Dr.Jai Ramachandra Pingle, who treated and operated for replacement of the hip, were examined as P.Ws.2 and 3 respectively and C. Obula Reddy, who shifted the injured to the hospital for treatment, was examined as P.W.4 besides marking Exs.A