The court emphasized the necessity of just compensation reflecting actual earnings and loss of dependency in motor accident claims.

JUDGMENT :

(NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA, J.)

The appellants/claimants filed the present appeal against the Award and decree passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-Cum-I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Adilabad, (hereinafter referred to ‘learned Tribunal’) in M.V.O.P.No.316 of 2017, dated 24.04.2019, wherein claimants/petitioners had filed the claim petition under Section 166 of M.V.Act seeking compensation of Rs.9,00,000/- on account of death of her husband, namely Sri Bapu, (herein after referred as ‘deceased’) who died in Motor Vehicle accident on 18.06.2017.

2. The brief facts of the case are that appellants/claimants earlier filed M.V.O.P.No.316 of 2017 under Section 166 of the M.V.Act, 1988 seeking compensation for the death of the deceased, who died in the accident alleged to have caused due to rash and negligent manner of the Auto rickshaw driver. It is contended that on 04.06.2017, the deceased along with his wife i.e., appellant/petitioner No.1 herein was proceeding to their village in Auto Rickshaw bearing No.TS-20-T-0949 and when said auto reached Tekulapalli, all of sudden the driver of Auto Rickshaw drove it in high speed in rash and negligent manner lost control, thereby auto turned turtle, and the deceased fell down on the ground and sustained grievous injuries all over the body more particularly on the head. Immediately, the deceased was shifted to Government Hospital Mancherial and Karimnagar and to Gandhi Hospital, Secunderabad for better treatment. On 18.06.2017, the deceased succumbed to injuries. The Police registered a case in Crime No.14/2017 under Section 304- IPC against the respondent no.1/driver of auto rickshaw bearing No.TS- 20-T-0949. The appellants/claimants claimed an amount of Rs.7,00,000/- as compensation for the death of the deceased under various heads.

3. The contention of the petitioners was that, at the date of accident the deceased was aged about 48 years and was earning Rs.15,000/- per month by doing agriculture work. Due to the said accident, the petitioners lost their dependency.

4. Before the learned Tribunal, respondent No.1 (driver-cum-owner of Auto Rickshaw) remained ex-parte. The respondent No.2 - TATA AIG General Insurance Company Limited filed a counter-affidavit, denying all the averments made in the claim petition, including the manner in which the accident took place, age, avocation and income of the deceased and submitted that the driver of the offending auto rickshaw was not holding valid driving licence at the time of accident and the vehicle was plying on the road without valid permit and fitness and further contended that the compensation claimed is excessive and prayed to dismiss the claim petition.

5. Basing on the pleadings and averments made by both the counsels, the Tribual framed the following issues which reads as under:

1. Whether the death of deceased caused in Motorcycle vehicle accident occurred on 04.06.2017 at about 1600 hrs., at Tekulapalli village of Kannepalli mandal on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of offending vehicle ie., Auto rickshaw bearing No.TS-20-T-0949?

2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation, if so, to what amount and from whom?

3. To what relief.?

6. Accordingly, after going into the entire material placed on record and the evidences placed by both the parties, the learned Tribunal allowed the claim in part and granted compensation of Rs.4,81,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum.

7. Being aggrieved by the meager compensation amount awarded by the learned Tribunal, the present a