* THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

AND

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN

+ M.A.C.M.A. NO: 115/2021

% Dated: 25.04.2025

# The New India Assurance Co. Limited

and another … Appellants

and

$ T.Roja Rani and others ….. Respondents

! Counsel for the Appellants : Sri C.Prakash Reddy

^ Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 4/

claimants : Sri Rahul Chowdary,

representing Ms.S.Pranathi.

< GIST :

> HEAD NOTE :

? Cases referred :

1. (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121

2. (2009)13 SCC 654 3. (2018) 6 SCC 765 4. ( 2018) 3 SCC 365 5. (2020) 13 SCC 486 6. (2014) 4 SCC 511

7. 2024 SCC Online SC 2584 8. 2024 SCC Online AP 3360 9. 2024 SCC Online AP 4073 10. 2023 SCC OnLine AP 1725 11. 2025 SCC OnLine SC 455

12. (2013) 9 SCC 166 13. (2015) 1 SCC 539

14. 2022 SCC OnLIne SC 1699

15. (2017) 16 SCC 680 16. (2018) 18 SCC 130 17. (2021) 11 SCC 780

18. 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1901 19. 2025 SCC OnLine SC 455 20. 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1683

21. (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121

22. (2015) 1 SCC 539 23. (2021) 6 SCC 188 24. (2021) 2 SCC 166 25. (2020) 4 SCC 228 26. (2011)14 SCC 639 27. (2021) 16 SCC 467

28. 2024 SCC OnLine AP 3955

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN + M.A.C.M.A. NO: 115/2021 % Dated: 25.04.2025 The New India Assurance Co. Limited and another …… Appellants and T.Roja Rani and others ….. Respondents DATE OF ORDER PRONOUNCED: 25 .04.2025 (per Hon‟ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari)

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers Yes/No may be allowed to see the Judgments?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Yes/No Marked to Law Reporters/Journals.

3. Whether Their Lordship wishes Yes/No to see the fair copy of the Judgment?

____________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J ________________________

CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN M.A.C.M.A. NO: 115/2021 JUDGMENT: (per Hon‟ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari)

Heard Sri C.Prakash Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the appellants-insurance company and Sri Rahul Chowdary, learned counsel representing Ms.S.Pranathi, learned counsel for respondents 1 to 4/claimants.

2. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short „the M.V.Act‟) has been filed by the appellants, the New India Assurance Company Limited, being aggrieved from the judgment and award dated 18.07.2019 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional District Judge, Tirupati(in short „the Tribunal‟) in M.V.O.P.No.191 of 2014. The aforesaid M.V.O.P. was filed by the claimants, the legal heirs of the deceased, Katta Murali, the present respondents 1 to 4.

I. Facts:

3. The case of the claimants was that Katta Murali died in the motor accident on 16.10.2013, when he was proceeding on his car bearing registration No.TN-20/CV-4497 and reached near Bhimulivaripalem check post, Tada Mandal on NH 16 road at about 12.30 a.m. at that time the driver of M/s.Vayodoot Road Carriers Pvt. Ltd, 1^st respondent herein, parked the lorry bearing registration MH- 06/AQ-4958 (in short „the offending vehicle‟) negligently on the right side of the road, very close to the road divider without parking lights and spot signals. The parked lorry was not having tail lights and radium stickers indicating the circumference to alert the driver of the vehicles proceeding on its back. Due to that the deceased was unable to identify the parked offending lorry. He applied the sudden brakes to avoid the accident. In spite thereof, the car went and dashed the lorry on its back. Due to that, the deceased sustained head injury and died on the spot. The vehicle was also badly damaged. The legal heirs of the deceased filed the claim petition, claiming a total compensation of Rs.40,00,000/- under different heads with interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of filing of petition till realization. Their further case was that the deceased was aged about 26 years on the date of the accident and he was working as Lecturer in Computer Science and Engineer