APHC010628702012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3365]

AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY ,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE DR V R K KRUPA SAGAR MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO:

1977/2012 Between:

Damarasingi Appaji ...APPELLANT AND Buydumuru Bandiyya 2 Ors and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Appellant:

1. G SAI NARAYANA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. SARIPALLI SUBRAHMANYAM

2. SRINIVASA RAO KAMARAJUGADDA The Court made the following:

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE Dr. V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR

JUDGMENT:

Questioning the inadequacy of compensation, the injured claimant preferred this Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 impugning the award dated 23.11.2010 of the learned Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Special Judge for trial of cases under S.Cs. and S.Ts. (POA) Act-cum- Additional District and Sessions Court, Vizianagaram (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Claims Tribunal’) in M.O.P.No.590 of 2008.

2. Heard arguments of Sri U.Nagendra Babu, the learned counsel representing Sri G.Sai Narayana Rao, the learned counsel for appellant and Sri Saripalli Subrahmanyam, the learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri Kamarajugadda Srinivasa Rao, the learned counsel for respondent No.3-Insurance Company.

3. The following aspects are required to be noticed:

On 14.07.2008 at about 5:00 P.M. near Vempadam R & B Road, two auto rickshaws travelling in opposite directions collided with each other. Auto rickshaw bearing registration No.AP-35-U- 6250 turned turtle and the passengers therein fell and suffered injuries. One of them is Sri Damarasingi Appaji. He suffered a fracture on right joint knee and also suffered other injuries. He was treated at hospitals. The accident was complained to police and Crime No.68 of 2008 was registered by police. After due investigation a charge sheet was laid showing the driver of auto rickshaw bearing registration No.AP-35-U-9854 drove the auto rickshaw rashly or negligently and caused the accident. The injured Sri Appaji making the driver of the auto rickshaw as respondent No.1 and the owner of the auto rickshaw as respondent No.2 and the insurer of the auto rickshaw as respondent No.3 filed M.O.P.No.590 of 2008 praying for a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-. Before the Claims Tribunal the driver and owner/respondent Nos.1 and 2 did not choose to appear and contest. Respondent No.3-Insurance Company raised a contest and disputed all the facts narrated in the claim petition.

4. Learned Claims Tribunal framed the following issues:

1) Whether the pleaded accident occurred resulting in injuries to the petitioner due to rash and negligent driving of the Auto bearing No.AP-35-U-9854 by its driver/R.1?

2) Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation? If so, what quantum and what is the liability of the respondents?

3) To what relief?

5. During enquiry, PWs.1 and 2 and Exs.A.1 to A.6 and Exs.X.1 and X.2 was the evidence for the claimant. Respondent No.3-Insurance Company produced Ex.B.1-insurance policy and did not adduce any oral evidence.

6. On considering the rival submissions and the evidence on record, the learned Claims Tribunal concluded that the accident was due to rash or negligent driving of driver of auto rickshaw bearing No.AP-35-U-9854. By virtue of Ex.B.1-insurance policy it was found that by the date of accident there was valid and effective insurance policy. It found no violations of terms and conditions of insurance policy. It fastened the liability on the tort-

feasor/driver and the owner of the same as vicarious liable and the insurance company as indemnifier was liable and thus, respondent Nos.1 to 3 were held jointly and severally liable for paying the compensation to the victim. After making assessment of the material on record, it granted compensation under various heads which read as below: