JUDGMENT:

The appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) challenging the Judgment and Award passed by the learned Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, Guntur dt.04.05.2007 rendered in M.V.O.P.No.1231 of 2005 whereby the claimants have been awarded the compensation of Rs.1,79,000/- holding that all the opponents are jointly and severally liable to pay the same with running interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the deposit of the amount, with proportionate costs of the petition.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred to as they are arrayed before the Tribunal in the claim petition.

3. The brief case, as pleaded in the claim petition, is as follows:

(a) A 45-year-old Lalu Naik-deceased used to earn Rs.5,000/- per month by running a hotel at the time of the accident. On

21.10.2005 at about 10.30 a.m., the deceased-Lalu Naik was standing on the left side of the road margin near the market, Amaravati Village. At that time, the driver of the Auto bearing No.AP 7 TT 6433 owned by the Opponent No.1 in the claim petition and insured with Opponent No.2, had driven the same very rashly and negligently and in a manner endangering human life, and dashed against the deceased-Lalu Naik. As a result, Lalu Naik received injuries, and immediately he was admitted to the Government Hospital, Amaravati, there from shifted to Government General Hospital, Guntur, and while taking treatment he died. The matter was reported to the Police alleging that the accident took place as a result of rash and negligent driving of the said offending Auto and based on the FIR lodged by the son of the deceased-Lalu Naik, a case in Crime No.90 of 2005 of Amaravati Police Station under Section 304-A IPC was registered and after investigation of the case, a charge sheet was submitted against the accused driver for having committed the offence under Sec.304-A IPC.

(b) The wife and the son of the deceased-Lalu Naik filed an application claiming compensation of a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Guntur on account of his death in the said road accident.

(c) Before the Tribunal, Respondent No.1/owner of the auto did not contest the matter. The 2nd respondent/Insurance Company filed a written statement contending inter alia that the petitioners are put to strict proof of the age and income of the deceased at the time of the accident. It is further contended that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the Auto bearing No.AP 7 TT 6433. The said offending Auto was not insured with Respondent No.2/Insurance Company at the time of the accident. The amount of compensation claimed by the petitioners is highly excessive and exorbitant and prayed to dismiss the claim petition.

(d) Based on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues:

(1) Whether the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Auto bearing No.AP 7 TT 6433?

(2) Whether the petitioners are entitled to the compensation, if so, what amount and from which of the respondents?

(3) To what relief?

(e) During the trial, in order to establish their claim, the wife of the deceased was examined as P.W.1, and Exs.A.1 to A.4 were got marked on behalf of the petitioners. R.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.B.1, B.2, and X.1 were got marked on behalf of the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company.

(f) On appreciation of the evidence of P.W.1, and placing reliance on Exs.A.1 to A.4 and Exs.B.1, B.2, and X.1 i.e., the certified copy of F.I.R, the certified copy of inquest report, the certified copy of Post Mortem Certificate and the certified copy of charge sheet, and Copy of the Insurance Policy, Driving Licence particulars and Driving Licence Extract respectively, the learned Tribunal came to a conclusion that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of auto bearing