IMPORTANT POINT
A learner's license does not preclude insurance liability if the driver is accompanied by a licensed instructor, and the insurer must prove policy violations to avoid liability.

JUDGMENT :

(Ravi Nath Tilhari, J.) :

Heard Sri Lakshmikanth Reddy, learned counsel for the claimants and Sri Naresh Byrapaneni, learned counsel for the United Insurance Company Limited represented by its Divisional Manager, Kurnool in both the appeals.

2. No representation for the owner, one of the respondents in the appeals.

3. The M.A.C.M.A.No.793 of 2017 has been filed by the claimants for enhancement of the compensation amount as awarded.

4. M.A.C.M.A.No.1184 of 2017 has been filed by the United India Insurance Company Limited challenging the same award dated 07.09.2016 passed in M.V.O.P.No.478 of 2014 by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-VI Additional District Judge, Kurnool (in short, ‘the Tribunal’). The appeals are filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1994 (in short, ‘the M.V. Act’).

5. The claimants filed the claim petition under Section 166of the M.V. Act claiming compensation of Rs.1,25,00,000/- for the death of Mr.M.Ravi Kumar in a motor accident dated 06.05.2014 at Obulapuram Mitta in Dhone Mandal. The claimant no.1 is a widow, claimant nos.2 and 3 are the children and claimant nos.4 and 5 are the parents of the deceased.

6. The claim petition was filed with pleading that when the deceased was riding safely on motor cycle bearing no.AP21-AA-6859, it was hit by one car bearing no.AP03-AA-0409 driven by its driver rashly and negligently at high speed coming from the opposite direction. The deceased was aged about 34 years. He was doing business of purchase & sale of granite and his earning was Rs.4,00,000/- per annum from the granite business of his own factory in the name and style of ‘Chaithanya Granites’. Besides, he was also earning Rs.50,000/- per annum by supervising the agriculture.

7. The owner of the car Mr.K.Srinivasulu, the 1st respondent in M.V.O.P.No.478 of 2014, filed counter, denying the averments of the petition. He submitted that the driver of the car was holding a valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident. The vehicle was insured with the United India Insurance Company and the policy was in force. He was not liable to pay any compensation and if at all, the Insurance Company had to pay.

8. The Insurance Company also filed counter submitting inter alia that the claimants be put to strict proof of their case. The owner of the car was not having valid and effective driving licence, but was having only Learner’s Licence Registration (LLR) valid from 03.04.2014 to 02.10.2014 to drive non-transport LMV, MCWG. He was driving the car without any observer and violated the terms and conditions of the policy. The Insurance Company was not liable to pay any compensation. The compensation claimed under various heads was said to be excessive.

9. The Tribunal framed the following issues:

“1. Whether the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the car bearing No.AP03-AA-04097?

2. Whether the deceased, Ravi Kumar died in the road accident?

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

4. To what relief?”

10. The claimants examined PWs.1 to 3 and marked Exs.A1 to A27 and Ex.X1. The Insurance Company examined RWs.1 to 3 and marked Exs.B1 to B4.

11. The Tribunal after considering the evidence on record arrived at finding that the accident occurred only due to rash and negligent driving of the car. RW1 was holding Learner’s Licence Registration (LLR). But, RW2 was holding effective driving licence to drive. At the time of accident RW2/P.Thimmappa was by the side of RW1. There was no violation of either the policy or Learner’s Licence Registration (LLR).

12. On the point of compensation, the Tribunal considered the age of the deceased as 35 years based on his date of birth as 06.05.1979 recorded in Ex.A7, the original S.S.C. mark sheet. The annual income of the deceased was taken as Rs.3,00,000/-after deductio