Motor Accident Tribunals must act as 'active explorers' of truth to determine 'just compensation,' accepting expert evidence on disability and assigning notional income to students based on realistic career potential rather than rigid minimum wage standards, while adhering strictly to the multiplier method for uniformity.

Appeal filed under Order 41 of CPC praying thet the Highcourt may be pleased toagainst the order and decree dated 06.04.2016 passed in M.V.O.P.No. 1020 of 2010 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (District Judge), Vizianagaram

IA NO: 2 OF 2018

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the petitioner to substitute the crtified copy vide CD.No.8246 of 2018 in MACMA.No.2300 of 2016 by obtaining original SSC and Intermediate Certificates which is already marked as Ex.A6 and Ex.7 and pass

Counsel for the Appellant:

1. G SAI NARAYANA RAO

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. NAGUMANTRI NAGESWARA RAO

2.

The Court made the following:

COMMON JUDGMENT:

Heard,

Sri U. Nagendra Babu, learned counsel representing Sri G. Sai Narayana Rao, learned counsel appearing for the claimant and Sri M. Srinu Babu, learned counsel representing Sri N. Nageswara Rao, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company. The other respondents arrayed in the present appeals remained ex parte since not appeared.

1. Dissatisfied and aggrieved by the Order passed in M.V.O.P. No.1020 of 2010, dated 06.04.2016 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (District Judge), Visakhapatnam, the claimant preferred M.A.C.M.A.No.2300 of 2016 seeking enhancement of the compensation. M.A.C.M.A.No.1698 of 2017 is filed by the Insurance Company.

2. The parties are arrayed as they were before the Tribunal.

3. The facts germane in the present appeal are as follows:

The petitioner on 08.04.2010 at about 08:30 p.m., suffered an accident while going to Vizianagaram from Visakhapatnam on motorcycle and particularly at Modavalasa Village, the lorry bearing No. AP 31 TT 1157 which is coming in the opposite direction driven by the 1st respondent in a rash and negligent manner with high speed without following the traffic rules. He sustained grievous injuries and was immediately taken to Sukhibhava Critical Care, Vizianagaram and thereafter considering the grievous injuries found on his body, the petitioner was shifted to Seven Hills Hospital, Visakhapatnam. There he was given ventilator support and Oxygen tracheostomy and PEG (Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy) were done. The petitioner was aged about 20 years and was studying 3rd year B-Tech (E.E.E.) in M.V.G.R. Engineering College and Technology and due to the injuries sustained in the accident, the petitioner is unable to complete B-Tech course. Due to the sudden accident, his life has become marred due to the frontal injuries and he has sought compensation for Rs.6,00,000/- towards medicines, transportation charges and extra nourishment and Rs.1,00,000/- towards general damages and Rs.13,00,000/- towards loss of future income and permanent disability.

4. The 4th respondent-Insurance Company, in oppugnation, denied the contentions by stating that the driver is not having valid license and the petitioner is put to strict proof regarding the averment of rash and negligent driving by the 1st respondent and also towards the amount spent regarding the treatment and disability, if any, suffered by him on account of the injuries sustained by him in the accident and that the owner and the insurer of the motorcycle are also necessary parties to the present proceedings and the petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties.

5. The Tribunal has formulated the following issues:

i. Whether the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of 1st respondent being the driver of Lorry bear