The court clarified that the claimant was not at fault in the accident, emphasizing the auto rickshaw driver's negligence, and enhanced the compensation to Rs.1,42,000/-.

JUDGMENT :

This Appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is filed by the injured claimant assailing the award dated 17.11.2011 of the learned Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional District Judge, (Fast Track Court), West Godavari, Eluru (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Claims Tribunal’) in O.P.No.55 of 2008.

2. B.Sanjaiah Gandhi, the learned counsel for appellant, Sri T.Ravi Teja, the learned counsel representing Smt. A.Jayanthi, the learned counsel for respondent No.2- Oriential Insurance Company Limited submitted arguments. Respondent No.1 was served with notice, but none entered appearance.

3. The injured claimant seeking compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- laid his claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the learned Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional District Judge, (Fast Track Court), West Godavari, Eluru. First respondent therein was the owner-cum-driver of the offending auto rickshaw. The second respondent therein was the insurance company. After due contest, the award was passed in the following terms:

“In the result, the claim petition is partly allowed for granting compensation of Rs.54,500/- (Rupees Fifty Four Thousand Five Hundred only) to the petitioner along with costs and interest at the rate of 7% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization from 1^st respondent only. 2^nd Respondent is discharged from its liability. The driver- cum-owner/R.1 is directed to deposit the awarded amount within one month along with costs and interest from the date of Order of this tribunal. On such deposit petitioner is permitted to withdraw entire awarded compensation amount along with costs and interest accrued thereon. Petitioner is not entitled to claim any interest on awarded amount, if the petition was dismissed for any reason, till the date the petition was restored. Advocate fee is fixed at Rs.2,000/-(Rupees Two Thousand Only).”

4. In this appeal filed by the claimant, the following points fall for consideration:

1. Whether the Claims Tribunal committed an error in stating that it was a case of contributory negligence?

2. Whether the compensation awarded is not only unjust but also is against the material on record?

3. Whether the Claims Tribunal committed an error in exonerating the liability of the insurance company which on facts it ought to have at least ordered the insurance company to pay first and recover later?

5. Learned counsel on both sides made their arguments on the above points and therefore, these points are to be addressed in this appeal.

POINT No.1: Whether the Claims Tribunal committed an error in stating that it was a case of contributory negligence?

6. An auto rickshaw bearing registration No.AP 37 W 6537 was going on road on 15.10.2007 and it reached Gopalapuram Village along the State Highway, and it was at about 3:00 P.M. the person driving this auto rickshaw without giving any signals, all of a sudden swerved the vehicle towards right side to go to a petrol bunk to have refueling. The appellant/claimant who was driving a motorcycle bearing registration No.AP 37 AL 2544 was behind this auto rickshaw and by the sudden swerving of the auto rickshaw towards right side he could not control his motorbike and went and dashed the auto rickshaw and consequently the motorbike fell down and he suffered injuries and the auto rickshaw fell down and the driver of the auto rickshaw suffered injuries. It was in such facts and circumstances; the claim petition was placed before the Claims Tribunal.

7. Sri Maganti Nageswara Rao, who was the owner-cum- driver of the auto rickshaw filed his counter stating that he was not at fault and since a buffalo came on to the road to avert any harm he slightly turned his auto rickshaw towards right side and the claimant out of his rash or negligent driving came and dashed his auto rickshaw and therefore for the injuries suffered by the claimant fault cannot be attributed against the auto rickshaw and its dr