The court ruled on proper compensation calculations for death in a motor accident, emphasizing the relevance of accurate income assessment and recognition of future prospects and dependents’ loss.

JUDGMENT :

B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO, J.

1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘the M.V.Act’) assailing the Award passed by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal – Cum - I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar in OP.No.1043 of 2013, dated 30.06.2015.

2. Appellant Nos.1 to 3 are the petitioners and respondent Nos.1 and 2 are the respondents in OP.No.1043 of 2013.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants - petitioners submits that respondent No.1 remained ex parte before the Tribunal, hence he is not a necessary party to the Appeal.

4.1. Appellants-petitioners have filed petition under Sections 140(c) and 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 r/w Rule 475/1B of A.P. Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 claiming compensation of Rs.9,50,000/- together with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of realization for the death of J.Rajeshwari in the motor vehicle accident.

4.2. Appellant No.1-petitioner No.1 is the husband, appellant Nos.2 and 3-petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are the children of the deceased J.Rajeshwari.

4.3. On 02.12.2013 at about 12:40 P.M. while J.Rajeshwari was proceeding in Auto bearing No.AP 28 Y 2215 as a passenger from Rajiv Gruha Kalpa, Nijampet towards Gandi Maisamma X Roads, when they reached at Bangaru Maisamma Temple, Bowrampet, Quthbullapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District a Lorry bearing No.HR 61 A 3217 came in opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the Auto, due to which J.Rajeshwari sustained multiple fracture injuries and died on the spot. On the complaint, PS Dundigal has registered a case in Crime No.727 of 2013 under Sections 338 and 304-A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the driver of the crime vehicle.

4.4. Deceased J.Rajeshwari was aged about 32 years as on the date of accident and was earning an amount of Rs.9,000/- per month by working as an Attender in M/s. Navodaya Packaging Products Private Limited and was contributing the same to the family. Due to the sudden death of the deceased J.Rajeshwari, appellant No.1-petitioner No.1 has lost his wife. Appellant Nos.2 and 3-petitioner Nos.2 and 3 have lost their mother and prayed to allow the OP as prayed for.

5. Respondent No.1 remained ex parte before the Tribunal.

6. Respondent No.2 filed counter and contended that the driver of the crime vehicle do not possess valid driving license as on the date of accident and denied the manner in which the accident has taken place, also denied the age and income of the deceased and prayed to dismiss the OP.

7. The learned Tribunal has framed the following issues:

1. Whether the deceased namely Late Smt.J.Rajeshwari died in a Motor vehicle accident on 02.12.2013 due to rash and negligent driving of Lorry bearing No.HR 61 A 3217 by its driver?

2. What was the age and income of the deceased?

3. Whether the petitioners are entitled to claim compensation and if so how much amount and from which of the Respondents?

4. To what relief?

8. Appellant No.1 is examined as PW.1 and also examined PW.2-P.Ravi, got marked Exs.A1 to A7. Respondent No.2 did not adduce any evidence but got marked Ex.B1.

9. The learned Tribunal after going through the evidence of PW.1 with that of the documents has awarded an amount of Rs.6,22,000/- with proportionate costs and interest @ 7% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit holding that respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the amount.

10. Learned counsel for the appellants-petitioners submits that the Tribunal erred in taking the income of the deceased at Rs.4,500/- p