The court emphasized the necessity of awarding just and fair compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, considering future prospects and adjusting interest rates appropriately.

JUDGMENT :

(per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari)

Heard Sri G.Haragopal, learned counsel for the appellant appearing through virtual mode and Sri Madhava Rao Nalluri, learned counsel for the claimants/respondents.

2. This appeal has been filed by the Divisional Manager of the New India Insurance Company limited, Ongole under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short “MV Act”) against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal – cum – Principal District Judge, Prakasam at Ongole (in short “Tribunal”) in MVOP.No.428 of 2010, dated 19.02.2013 by which the Tribunal partly allowed the claim filed by the claimants/respondent Nos.1 to 3, awarding compensation of Rs.26,79,260/- with proportionate costs and subsequent interest @ 12% per annum from the date of the claim petition till the date of realization, holding the present respondent No.5 and the appellant – Insurance Company, jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation, with further directions.

3. The respondents-claimants filed MVOP under Section 166 of MV Act claiming compensation of Rs. 28,00,000/-, inter-alia pleading, on account of death of one Emani Venkateswarlu in a motor vehicle accident caused by rash and negligent driving of the lorry bearing No. AP07T/1467 (offending lorry) owned by the present respondent No.5 and being driven by present respondent No.4. The deceased was aged about 26 years at the time of death and working as Assistant Professor in Malineni Lakshmaiah Engineering College, Kanumalla, Singarayakonda and was earning Rs.18,540/- per month towards his salary.

4. The insurance company contested the claim petition and filed counter. The plea was taken that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess valid driving licence, which was violation of the terms of the policy and hence the insurance company was not liable to pay the compensation. The deceased had no valid driving licence to ride the motorcycle. The accident occurred due to the negligence of the deceased. The compensation as claimed was excessive and the claimants were not entitled for the same. With respect to the income, age and avocation of the deceased, the insurance company pleaded that the claimants should be put to strict proof.

5. The driver of the offending lorry did not appear inspite of service and was set exparte on 27.12.2010. The owner, appeared and adopted the counter of the insurance company.

6. The Tribunal framed the following issues:

“1. Whether the accident dated 10.10.2010 in which the deceased Emani Venkateswarlu died, occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry bearing No.AP07T/1467 by the first respondent as alleged in the petition?

2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to claim for compensation? If so, to what amount and against whom?

3. To what relief?”

7. The claimants/respondents in support of their claim, examined PWs.1 to 4 and got marked Exs.A1 to A10 and Ex.X1 on their behalf. For the Insurance Company, its Divisional Manager was examined as RW.1, and Exs.B1 and B2 were marked.

8. The Tribunal recorded finding on issue No.1 that, the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending lorry in which the deceased died. The insurance company failed to prove the contributory negligence on the part of the deceased. On issue No.2, the Tribunal determined the age of the deceased as 26 years; his income was Rs. 18,540/- per month. It deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased and applied the multiplier of 18 and granting the amount under other heads towards loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses @ Rs.5,000/-, 2,000/- & 2,500/- respectively, the total compensation of Rs.26,79,260/- was awarded with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of realization.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the challenge is only on the point of quantum of compensation. The monthly income /salary of the deceased at Rs.18,540/- is not correct. T