JUDGMENT :

V.Sujatha, J.

The appeal is filed by the appellant/APSRTC, challenging the order and decree dated 30.04.2021 passed in M.V.O.P.No.96 of 2017 by the learned Chairman, Principal Motor Accidents Claims’ Tribunal, Chittoor, wherein the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.9,27,600/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs Twenty Seven Thousand Six Hundred only) to the petitioner/respondent No.1 herein, as against the claim of Rs.10,00,000/-, for the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident that occurred on 25.10.2015.

02. For the purpose of convenience, the parties will be referred to as they are arrayed before the Tribunal.

03. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is as follows:

a) On 25.10.2015, while the petitioner/injured was proceeding on a motorcycle bearing No.AP03-BE-4481 from his house to M.V. Giri Bus Stop to collect labour charges, the 1^st respondent, while driving the APSRTC bus bearing No.AP03-Z-5087 in a rash and negligent manner and attempting to overtake a lorry, dashed against the petitioner’s motorcycle, resulting in grievous injuries to his right leg and other parts of the body. Immediately after the accident, one M.Manjunath of Thagguvaripalli shifted the petitioner to Government Hospital, Bangarupalem, and thereafter, for better treatment, he was shifted to SVRR Hospital, Tirupati. On the basis of a complaint lodged by the petitioner’s father, Bangarupalem Police registered a case in Crime No.139 of 2015 against the 1^st respondent and, after investigation, filed a charge sheet for the offence punishable under Section 338 IPC in C.C.No.591 of 2015 on the file of the III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chittoor.

b) It was contended by the petitioner that, at the time of the accident, the petitioner was aged about 25 years and was working as a painter, earning Rs.400/- per day. Due to the accident, his right leg was amputated, rendering him incapable of continuing his avocation as a painter, which requires prolonged standing. It is also contended that he became permanently disabled and dependent on his aged parents for his livelihood. The District Medical Board, Government Hospital, Chittoor, issued a disability certificate assessing permanent disability at 70%. Therefore, both respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation.

04. Before the Tribunal, the 1^st remained remained ex parte.

05. The 2^nd respondent/APSRTC filed a counter denying the allegations made in the claim petition. It was contended that the compensation claimed is excessive and exorbitant. According to the 2^nd respondent, the accident occurred solely due to the rash and negligent riding of the petitioner himself. It was pleaded that while the APSRTC bus was proceeding slowly and overtaking a lorry, the petitioner, riding the motorcycle at high speed and in a negligent manner, dashed against the left rear wheel of the bus and sustained injuries. It was further contended that the owner and insurer of the motorcycle were necessary parties and non-impleadment thereof renders the petition bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. The occupation and income of the petitioner were also denied.

06. Basing on the pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues for trial:

“1. Whether the accident in question was occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of APSRTC us bearing registration No.AP03-Z-5087?

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for any compensation, and if so, to what amount and from whom?

3. To what relief?”

07. On behalf of the petitioner, P.W.s 1 to 4 were examined and Exs.A1 to A4 and Ex.X1 were marked. On behalf of the 2^ndrespondent, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced.

08. After hearing both parties and after considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition as follows:

“In the result, the petition is partly allowed with proportionate costs, awarding compensation of Rs.9,27,600/-, by holding that the respondents 1 and 2 are jointly and severally li