The court established that both drivers were negligent in causing the accident, leading to equal apportionment of liability for compensation.

JUDGMENT :

The 4^th respondent [the United India Insurance Co. Ltd.], in M.V.O.P.No.178 of 2008 on the file of learned IX Additional District Judge-cum-Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (FTC), Chittoor (for short “MACT”) filed the present appeal invoking Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “the M.V. Act”), questioning the propriety and sustainability of the decree and order dated 28.12.2011 therein passed therein by the learned MACT.

2. Respondent Nos.1 to 6 herein were the claimants before the learned MACT and respondent Nos.7 to 9 were respondents 1 to 3.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be hereinafter referred with reference to their status before the learned MACT i.e., is as and how they are arrayed in the impugned order.

4. Claimant No.1 is the wife, claimant Nos.2 to 6 are the children of one M.Venkatesu Gowdu (hereinafter referred to as “deceased”). 1^st respondent L.Thomas, is the registered owner of tractor bearing No.AP 03 D-3079 (hereinafter referred to as “offending vehicle No.1”) and the 2^nd respondent Roshan Zameer is its purchaser by the date of accident and also the owner-cum-driver. 3^rd respondent is the owner of the auto bearing No.CAS 3017 (hereinafter referred to as “offending vehicle No.2”). 4^th respondent is the insurer of the said vehicle.

Case of the claimants:

5.[i] The deceased was travelling in offending vehicle No.2 on 07.08.2003 along with some other villagers from Baireddipalle village to go to their village Ramanapalle. When they were near Ramarachabanda place near Ganginayanipalle Village, Baireddipalle Mandal, within the limits of Baireddipalle Police Station, Chittoor District, both the offending vehicles driven by respective drivers, dashed against each other in a rash and negligent manner, whereby the auto in which the deceased was travelling, turned into 90 degree angle to its right side, then the deceased who was sitting on the left side, was thrown between the two wheels and sustained head injury apart from the injuries on the ribs, legs etc., the deceased was shifted to Dr.Balaram Nursing Home for first aid, from there to CMC Hospital, Vellore, but on the way to hospital, he succumbed to injuries. A case in Crime No.33 of 2003 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304A and 337 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “I.P.C.”) against the driver of the tractor (offending vehicle No.1). It is the specific case of the claimants that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the drivers of both the vehicles. Hence, all the respondents are liable to pay compensation.

[ii] The deceased was aged about 59 years, hale and healthy, agriculturist, earning Rs.75,000/- per annum and contributing the same to the family. He was also doing the business of selling sheeps and cows in and around the villages earning Rs.5,000/- per month additionally. Hence, the claimants are entitled for a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- being the dependants and legal heirs.

6. Owners of both offending vehicles remained ex parte. The 4^th respondent-Insurance Company (appellant herein) with whom the offending vehicle No.2 was insured, alone contested the case.

7. [i] The case of the appellant (4^th respondent) in brief is that the petitioner shall prove the pleaded accident, death of the deceased due to accident, dependency and entitlement of the claimants for compensation, negligence of driver of offending vehicle No.2 in occurrence of the accident, age, occupation and income of deceased, valid and effective insurance policy for offending vehicle No.2 issued by the 4^th respondent, valid and effective driving licence for the driver of offending vehicle No.2, compliance of conditions of police by the 3^rd respondent-own