IMPORTANT POINT
The comprehensive insurance policy covers pillion riders, and compensation must reflect the impact of permanent disability on earning capacity.

JUDGMENT :

This appeal is preferred by the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company in M.V.O.P.No.659 of 2005 aggrieved by the order dated 29.04.2008 passed by the Chairman, Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal - cum - II Additional District Judge, Vijayawada, (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) awarding compensation of Rs.4,20,000/- to the petitioner.

2. For convenience and to avoid confusion, the parties hereinafter will be referred to as they are arrayed before the Tribunal.

3. In brief, the facts of the case are:

On 27.06.2003, the petitioner went to Avanigadda village on his Bajaj motorcycle bearing registration No.AP-6AA-2868 keeping the petitioner as a pillion rider. After completing their work, they returned to Vuyyuru at about 10.30 a.m., and when they reached Puligadda Aqueduct, the 1st respondent, who drove the vehicle at high speed and, while averting to hit a lorry coming in the opposite direction, lost control over the vehicle. As a result, the vehicle hit the divider wall; due to the said impact, the petitioner fell and sustained injuries to his right leg above the knee. The 1st respondent escaped unhurt, took the petitioner to Vuyyuru in his vehicle, and got him admitted to Charithasree Hospital, Vijayawada, for treatment. Thereupon, the petitioner’s right leg was amputated. Avanigadda P.S. registered a case in Crime No.88 of 2003 against the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent is the owner, and the 2nd respondent is the insurer of the vehicle; hence, both the respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the petitioner.

4. The first respondent did not file a counter. The second respondent/Insurance company filed a counter by denying all the material allegations in the petition.

5. During the enquiry, on behalf of the petitioner, P.Ws.1 to 4 were examined, and Exs.A.1 to A.20 and Exs.X.1 to X.5 were marked. On behalf of the respondents, R.W.1 was examined, and Ex.B.1-copy of the policy was marked.

6. Having considered the material available on record and the rival submissions of both the counsel, the Tribunal, by an order dated 29.04.2008, partly allowed the claim petition awarding compensation of Rs.4,20,000/- i.e., for pain and suffering of Rs. 1,20,000/-; for medical expenses of Rs.50,000/-; for cost of artificial limb and its maintenance of Rs.1,00,000/-; and loss of amenities of life of Rs.1,50,000/-, against the respondents and directing the 2nd respondent/Insurance company to deposit the total compensation with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. Challenging the same, the Insurance company preferred the instant appeal.

7. Heard both sides.

8. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal has relied on judgment reported in 2002 (6) ALD 362 (AP), which is not applicable as the risk of the pillion rider is not covered under the policy. The Tribunal has not examined the evidence of R.W.1 and Ex.B.1-policy, and no proof has been filed regarding loss of income, including artificial leg. The learned counsel, therefore, prayed to set aside the order of the Tribunal.

9. The learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent/petitioner submits that the petitioner was about 37 years old as of the date of the accident and is doing business in Cable T.V. Net Work. He is the Proprietor of Prudhvi Satellite & Communications at Vuyyuru and earns Rs.10,000/- per month. The Doctors issued Ex.A.20 medical certificate to the effect that the physical disability of the petitioner was estimated at 75%. The petitioner was supplied with an artificial leg by Endolite India Limited at a cost of Rs.1,02,000/- which is apparent from the evidence of P.W.3. The petitioner is the only breadwinner of his family consisting of his wife, children and parents. Because of the accident, he is not able to move from one place to another without the assistance of other people, and his family members are deprived of his income and are struggling financially. Ho