The court held that the Claims Tribunal's compensation assessment was inadequate, leading to an enhancement of the total compensation to Rs.1,84,000/- for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident.

JUDGMENT:

In this Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claimant impugned the award dated 18.03.2011 of learned Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirupati (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Claims Tribunal’) in M.V.O.P.No.449 of 2009.

2. Heard arguments of Sri J.Ugra Narasimha, the learned counsel for appellant and Sri Srinu Babu, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri N.Nageswara Rao, the learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance Company. None entered appearance for respondent No.1 who is owner of the offending vehicle.

3. The following facts are required to be noticed:

The appellant as claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- for the injuries he sustained in a motor vehicle accident.

Respondent No.1 therein was the owner of the offending vehicle and respondent No.2 therein was the insurer. The appellant has been a Supervisor in a Fast-Food Centre, Tirupati and earning Rs.4,500/- per month. On 25.11.2007 he was one of the passengers in an auto rickshaw bearing No.AP-03-V-4361 owned by respondent No.1 and insured by respondent No.2. At about 8:30 A.M. on that day while the auto rickshaw was going on the road it was driven at high speed and rashly or negligently by its driver and when a cow was crossing the road he was unable to control the vehicle and as a result the passengers in the vehicle fell down which include the appellant. He sustained various injuries all over his body and was treated at SVRRGG Hospital, Tirupati. Seeking compensation, he filed the claim petition before the Claims Tribunal. The owner of the vehicle did not choose to contest. The insurance company raised its contest. The learned Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirupati framed the following issues for trial:

1) Whether the petitioner sustained injuries in motor accident on 25.11.2007 due to rash and negligent driving of three wheeler Auto Rickshaw bearing No.AP 03 V 4361 by its driver as pleaded by the petitioner?

2) Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from whom?

3) To what relief?

4. During trial, on behalf of the claimant, PWs.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.10 and Ex.X.1 were marked. Neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the contesting insurance company. The insurance company made a statement before the Claims Tribunal that by the date of accident the offending vehicle was covered by a valid and effective insurance policy.

5. After considering the evidence on record and after considering the submissions made on both sides, the learned Claims Tribunal held that the claimant/appellant herein sustained injuries on 25.11.2007 because of rash or negligent driving of the auto rickshaw bearing registration No.AP-03-V-4361. Under various heads it assessed the claim for compensation and granted Rs.90,000/- as compensation under the following heads:

6. The operative portion of the order reads as below:

“In the result, petition is allowed in part with proportionate costs awarding compensation amount of Rs.90,000/- (Rupees Ninety Thousand only) to the petitioner with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of filing of the petition till the date of deposit recoverable by the petitioner from the respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally. Rest of the claim of the petitioner is disallowed without costs. Time for deposit is two months. On such deposit, petitioner is permitted to withdraw entire compensation a