The court upheld the compensation awarded for wrongful death due to negligence, affirming the Tribunal's income assessment and liability determination despite claims of contributory negligence.

JUDGMENT

Aggrieved by the impugned award and order passed in M.V.O.P.No.31 of 2016 on the file of the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-VII Additional District Judge, Prakasam District, Ongole whereby the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.10,90,000/- towards total compensation to the claimants, this instant appeal is preferred by the Insurance company (respondent No.3 before the Tribunal).

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 claimants filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.12,00,000/- towards compensation for the death of the Naresh Babu @ Naresh, (herein after referred to as “deceased”) who died in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 01.01.2015.

4) The brief averments of the claim petition are as follows: On 31.12.2014 at about 11.30 p.m. the deceased along with Bondalapati Babu went to Yerragondapalem centre at Thripuranthakam on a motorcycle bearing No.AP 27 AZ 2037 to meet their friends on the eve of new year. While returning to home, when they reached Vinukonda area, respondent No.2 being the driver of the lorry bearing No.AP 21W 3579 (hereinafter referred to as “offending vehicle) drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and without blowing horn, dashed against the motorcycle of the deceased, as a result of which, the deceased and the said Babu fell down, and the deceased sustained severe injuries. Immediately, pillion rider (by name Babu) and the relatives shifted the injured to private hospital at Thripuranthakam, where the Doctors gave first aid and advised to shift the injured to the other Hospital for better treatment, in the meanwhile the deceased succumbed to the injuries. The Thripuranthakam police have registered a case in Crime No.01 of 2015 against respondent No.2, who is the driver of the crime vehicle.

5) The marriage between the deceased and petitioner No.1 was performed about 7 months prior to the accident. The deceased was the sole bread winner and hale and healthy, working as Auto driver, earning Rs.10,000/- per month. Due to the accident, the petitioners lost their livelihood and love and affection; suffered a lot mentally. Respondent No.1 is the owner of the offending vehicle, respondent No.2 is the driver of the offending vehicle and respondent No.3 is the insurance company.

6) Respondent Nos.1 and 2 remained ex parte.

7) Respondent No.3 – Insurance company filed a counter by denying the claim of the claimants and contended that the deceased did not possess valid and effective driving license to drive the two- wheeler at the time of the accident. Owner of the motorcycle was not shown as party to the proceedings, therefore, the petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. Respondent No.2 driver of the offending vehicle had no valid driving license at the time of accident, respondent No.1 knowing fully well about this information allowed respondent No.2 to drive the crime vehicle, and the compensation claimed by the claimants is highly excessive, arbitrary and requested to dismiss the petition.

8) Based on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues for trial:

(1) Whether the deceased – Patibandla Naresh Babu @ Naresh S/o. (Late) Balakotaiah, died in a road accident that was taken place on 01.01.2015 at about 00.15 a.m. at opposite to SBI ATM, Tripuranthakam on Kurnool- Guntur Highway road in Prakasam District due to rash and negligent driving of the lorry bearing No.AP 2