The court upheld the applicability of 'no-fault' liability provisions under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, confirming the Tribunal's compensation award without requiring proof of negligence.

JUDGMENT :

NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA, J.

1. M.A.C.M.A.No.32 of 2020 is filed by the National Insurance Company Limited and Cross Objection No.35 of 2020 is filed by the Claimants being aggrieved and unsatisfied against the Award and decree passed by the Motor Vehicles Claims Tribunal-Cum-I Addl.District Judge, Mahabubnagar, (hereinafter referred to ‘learned Tribunal’) in M.V.O.P.No.250 of 2014, dated 04.02.2019.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be hereinafter referred to as they are arrayed before the learned Tribunal.

3. The brief facts of the case are that on 19.11.2013, the deceased along with another were proceeding on a motorcycle bearing registration No.AP-22 AQ-4730 from Ranipet to Gangapur village on Jadcherla Kalwakurthy road and when they reached near Yerra kaluva, an unknown vehicle being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner hit the deceased motorcycle, as a result, both the deceased who was a pillion rider and also rider of the said motorcycle, fell on the road and sustained severe grievous injuries. Immediately, the deceased was shifted to hospital and while undergoing treatment, the deceased succumbed to injuries. The Jadcherala Police, registered a case vide Crime No.577 of 13. The petitioner claimed that, due to the sudden death of the deceased the petitioners lost their source of income and the claimants were depended on the deceased for their livelihood and claimed compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation.

4. Before the learned Tribunal, respondent No.1 (Owner of the Motor Cycle No.AP-22-AQ-4730 remained ex-parte. Respondent No.2 filed counter affidavit and contended that the petitioners filed the petition filed under Sections 140 or 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, as such the petition is not maintainable, as it is a ‘hit and run case’ and also contends both the police and the insured failed to discharge their mandatory duties contemplated under Sections 134 and 158 (6) respectively of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 and there was no negligence at all on the part of the driver of the motorcycle registration No.AP-22-AQ-4730 at the time of accident and that, there is contributory negligence on the part negligence contributory of the rider of the motorcycle and prayed to dismiss the petition in so far as respondent No.2 is concerned.

5. Basing on the pleadings of the both the parties, the learned Tribunal has framed the following issues:

“(i) Whether the death of the deceased late Mandla Kesavulu died out of a motor accident occurred on 19.11.2013 at about 08.00 pm near Yerra kaluva within the limits of Gangapur village on Jadcherla Kalwakurthy road on account of the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the motorcycle bearing registration no.AP-22-AQ-4730?

(ii) Whether the petitioners are entitled to seek the compensation for the death of late Mandla Kesavulu and if so, what amount and from whom?

(iii) To what relief?”

6. In support of the case of the claimant, the claimant examined herself as P.W1 and got marked Exs.A1 to A14. On behalf of the respondents, RW1 was examined and marked. Ex.B1 and B2 are marked.

7. After perusing the oral and documentary evidences and going into the entire record and the evidences placed by both the parties, the learned Tribunal allowed the claim petition in part and granted compensation of Rs.3,58,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum.

8. Being aggrieved with the c