JUDGMENT:

Aggrieved by the impugned award and order passed in M.V.O.P.No.153 of 2011, on the file of the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Judge, Vijayawada, whereby the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.2,36,000/- towards total compensation to the claimant against 1st and 2nd respondents, this instant appeal is preferred by the claimant towards enhancement of compensation.

2. For the sake of convenience, both the parties in the appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed in the claim application.

3. The aforesaid M.V.O.P.No.153 of 2011 was filed by the claimant, under Sections 140 and 166 of Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- for the death of Lingam Ranga Rao in a motor vehicle accident occurred on

25.10.2010. The claimant is the wife of the deceased.

4. The brief averments of the claim petition are as follows:

On 25.10.2010 at about 11:30 a.m., deceased Lingam Ranga Rao was proceeding on his moped on the left side margin of the road from Mangalagiri to Yerrabalem. The driver of offending car bearing No.AP 09AQ 4410 Hyundai Accent car drove it n a rash and negligent manner at high speed and dashed against moped and as a result deceased fell from the moped and sustained grievous injuries. The deceased was shifted to Government General Hospital, Guntur and he died while undergoing treatment. A case in Crime No.177 of 2010 was registered against the driver of the car at Mangalagiri Police Station. 1st respondent is the owner and 2nd respondent is the insurer of the offending vehicle car.

5. 1st respondent remained ex parte.

6. 2nd respondent filed a written statement that it is the case of hit and run by unknown vehicle and the Insurance Company is not liable to pay any compensation to the claimant.

7. Based on the above pleadings of both the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues for trial:

1. Whether the deceased Lingam Ranga Rao died in a motor vehicle accident occurred on 25.10.2010 at

11:30 hours in front of R&B Bunglow, Mangalagiri due to rash and negligent driving of driver/owner of the vehicle/car bearing No.AP 09A 4410?

2. What is the correct age and income of the deceased by the date of accident?

3. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the compensation, as prayed for? If so, from whom and to what amount? 4. To what relief?

8. During the course of enquiry, on behalf of the claim petitioner, P.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and got marked Exs.A1 to A7 and Exs.X1 to X3. On behalf of 2nd respondent/Insurance Company, no witnesses were examined but Ex.B1 was marked.

9. At the culmination of the enquiry, on appreciation of the entire evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.2,36,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum to the claimant towards total compensation against 1st and 2nd respondents. Aggrieved thereby, the claimant filed this instant appeal for enhancement of compensation as prayed in the grounds of appeal.

10. Heard Sri V.Padmanabha Rao, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri V.Hemanth Kumar, learned counsel for 2nd respondent/Insurance Company.

11. Now, the points for determination are:

1) Whether the order passed by the Tribunal needs any interference?

2) Whether the claimant is entitled for enhancement of compensation as prayed for?

POINTS:

12. The case of the petitioner is that she is none other than the wife of the deceased and her husband died in a road accident which was caused by the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle car. No doubt P.W.1 is not an eye witness to the accident and P.W.2 is an eye witness to the accident. As per his evidence, the entire accident was occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. Ex.A1-attested copy of the First Information Report and Ex.A5-attested copy of the Charge Sheet supports the case of the claimant. On appreciation of the entire evidence on record, the Tribunal came to conclusion that because of rash and negligent driving of the