IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that in assessing compensation for dependents, proper consideration of income and deductions for personal expenses is crucial, particularly in cases involving multiple dependents.

JUDGMENT :

A.V. RAVINDRA BABU, J.

M.A.C.M.A. No. 966 of 2019:

1. Challenge in this MACMA made by the appellants is to the award, dated 05.07.2018 in M.V.O.P. No. 413 of 2015, on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-VII Additional District & Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru (“Tribunal” for short), whereunder the tribunal dealing with a claim for compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- on account of death of Mukala Venkata Rao (hereinafter will be referred to as “deceased”) in a motor vehicle accident, which was occurred on 17.03.2015, awarded a sum of Rs.15,32,500/- towards compensation and apportioned as Rs.10,32,500/- to the first petitioner and Rs.2,50,000/- each to the petitioners 2 and 3.

M.A.C.M.A. No. 86 of 2019:

2. Challenge in this MACMA made by the unsuccessful second respondent/APSRTC is to the award, dated 05.07.2018 in M.V.O.P. No. 413 of 2015, on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-VII Additional District & Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru (“Tribunal” for short), questioning the quantum of compensation and further with a contention that APSRTC is not liable to pay any compensation.

3. Both MACMA Nos.966 of 2019 and 86 of 2019 arose as against the award, dated 05.07.2018 in M.V.O.P. No. 413 of 2015 as such they can conveniently dispose of by virtue of a common judgment.

4. The parties to this MACMA will hereinafter be referred to as described before the tribunal for the sake of convenience.

5. The case of the petitioners, in brief, according to the averments set out in the claim before the tribunal, is that the first petitioner is wife of deceased and petitioners 2 and 3 are sons of the deceased, aged about 24 years and 23 years respectively and they used to reside along with their mother as on the date of death of deceased.

On 17.03.2015 morning the deceased left his house, Munduru on his Hero Honda Passion Plus Motorcycle bearing No. AP-37-AP-6266 in order to go to Seetharampuram to attend his personal work at his relatives house. On the way when he reached near the culvert and brick kiln of Bondada Srinivas on Eluru-Jangareddigudem road, outskirts of Munduru village, Pedavegi Mandal, West Godavari District at about 8.50 a.m. one APSRTC bus bearing No. AP-37-Z-0032 (hereinafter will be referred to as “offending vehicle”) which was coming from Bhadrachalam and proceeding towards Bhimavaram and driven by its driver first respondent in a rash and negligent manner, at high speed, without following traffic rules, dashed against the motorcycle of the deceased. As a result, the deceased fell down on the road along with his motorcycle and sustained severe injuries on all vital parts of his body. The deceased during his shifting to the hospital died on the way. The Station House Officer, Pedavegi Police Station registered FIR in Crime No. 46 of 2015 under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code. The deceased was aged about 47 years, hale and healthy and earning Rs.28,000/- per annum as cultivating tenant, milk vendor, kirana and general merchant and also by running a tea hotel and cool drinks business, but due to his sudden demise, the petitioners being the dependants on his earnings, lost their dependency and also love and affection. Hence, the petition.

6. The first respondent, driver of the offending vehicle remained ex-parte.

7. The second respondent/APSRTC got filed a written statement by denying the averments in the petition and putting the burden on the petitioners to prove the manner of accident and the rash and negligent act against the first respondent and their dependency. There was no negligence on the part of first respondent in the occurrence of accident, but the accident took place due to own fault of the deceased. Hence, the respondents are not liable to pay any compensation.

8. On the basis of the above pleadings, the tribunal settled the following issues for trail:

(1) Whether Mukala Venakta Rao died in a motor accident that took place on 17.03.2015 at 8-50 a.m. ne