SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 18611

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3333]


(Special Original Jurisdiction)


MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 91/2022



Between:


1. TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, ARTS COLLEGE ROAD, SRIKAKULAM TOWN, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. HOLDING ITS OFFICE AT HYDERABAD REP, BY ITS AUTHORIZED PERSON APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NO.2 ...APPELLANT


AND


1. MANGI DAMAYANTHI, W/O. LATE LAXMINARAYANA @ SRINU, AGED 22 YEARS, HOUSE WIFE, RESIDING AT 1-1-285, KONDI VEEDHI, MOGILIPADU VILLAGE, PALASA MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.


2. MANGI VENU, S/O. LATE LAXMINARAYANA @ SRINU, AGED 2 YEARS, MINOR, MOTHERS PROTECTION, (PETITIONER NO.2 BEING MINOR REP, BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN- MOTHER 1ST PETITIONER- MANGI DAMAYANTHI)


3. MANGI ADILAXMI, W/O. LATE BEEMUDU @ BHIMA RAO, AGED 54 YEARS, HOUSE WIFE, D.N0.326, BENDI COLONY, BENDI VILLAGE, VAJRAPU KOTTURU (M), SRIKAKULAM DT.


4. NARTHU DHILLESWARA RAO, , S/O. LATE NARAYANA, AGED 56 YEARS, DRIVER CUM OWNER OF TATA ACE VAN BEARING NO. AP 30 U 8917,KOTTAPUTTUGA VILLAGE, KAVITI MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.


...RESPONDENT(S):


THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA


TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX


__________________


JUSTICE V. SUJATHA


Date: 10.03.2026 KGR

Appeal filed under Order 41 of CPC praying thet the Highcourt may be pleased toThe appellants begs to present this Memorandum of Grounds of Civil Miscellaneous Appeal to this Hon'ble High Court being aggrieved by the decree and judgment dated 23-12-2021 passed in MVOP no. 190 / 2018 on the file of Motor Accident claims Tribunal cum Principal District Judge, Srikakulam

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

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 pleased to grant stay the execution of the decree and judgment passed in MVOP No 190 of 2018 dated 23-12-2021 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Principal District Judge Srikakulam

Counsel for the Appellant:

1. D RAVI KIRAN

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. SRINIVASA RAO KURAPATI

The Court made the following:

JUDGMENT:

This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company challenging the order and decree dated 23.12.2021 passed in M.V.O.P. No.190 of 2018 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Srikakulam, wherein the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.12,94,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Ninety Four Thousand only) to the petitioners/respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein, as against the claim of Rs.15,00,000/-, on account of the death of the deceased, Mangi Laxminarayana @ Srinu, in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 08.04.2016.

For the purpose of convenience, the parties will be referred to as they are arrayed before the Tribunal.

Brief facts of the case are as follows:

a) On 08.04.2016, in the morning, the deceased Mangi Laxminarayana started from his village Bendi to go to his sister‟s house at Ponduruputtuga village on his motorcycle bearing No.AP 30 AE 4331. After completion of his work, when he reached near Kalika Marrichettu on the B.T. Road from Silagam to NH-16 road at about 11:10 a.m., the 1st respondent drove the Tata Ace goods carriage van bearing No.AP 30 U 8917 (hereinafter referred to as the offending vehicle) in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle of the deceased and fled away from the scene. The deceased sustained grievous injuries and was shifted to Community Health Centre, Ichapuram, in a 108 Ambulance. The Medical Officer referred him to MKCG Hospital, Berhampur for better treatment, where he succumbed to the injuries at about 3:30 p.m. on the same day. The Station House Officer, Kaviti Police Station, registered a case in Crime No.11 of 2016 under Section 304-A IPC against the 1st respondent and filed charge sheet in C.C. No.191 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ichapuram.

b) It is the case of the petitioners that the deceased was working as a welder and earning Rs.15,000/- per month. He was hale and healthy at the time of the accident. The 1st petitioner was five months pregnant at the time of the accident and the 2nd petitioner was born on 26.08.2016, after the death of the deceased. The father of the deceased died on 21.12.2016. The petitioners, being dependents on the earnings of the deceased, lost their source of livelihood and suffered mental agony. Hence, they filed the claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-.

Before the Tribunal, respondent Nos.1 to 3 were set exparte.

The 2nd respondent/Insurance Company filed a written statement denying the material averments. It was contended that the offending vehicle was not involved in the accident and that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the deceased himself. It was further contended that the FIR reveals that it is a self-accident and that the claim petition was filed in collusion with the police to claim compensation. It was also contended that the driver did not possess a valid driving licence and that the compensation claimed was excessive.

Basing on the pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues for trial:

“1. Whether the deceased/Mangi Laxminarayana alias Srinu died on a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top