Tribunals and appellate courts are empowered to award just and reasonable compensation in motor accident cases even if the final amount exceeds the total sum originally claimed in the petition, provided the amount is supported by legal principles regarding income, future prospects, and life expectancy.

Appeal filed under Order 41 of CPC before the High Court to allow the appeal by setting aside the Judgment and Decree passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Cum- VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari Eluru passed in M.V.O.P.No. 890/2016 dated 01.03.2023 and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

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 grant stay of execution of Decree passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Cum- VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari Eluru passed in M.V.O.P.No. 890/2016 dated 01.03.2023 pending disposal of the above M.A.C.M.A and pass

Counsel for the Appellant:

1.K SRINIVASA PRASAD SC For APSRTC

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.

The Court made the following:

JUDGMENT:

The APSRTC has preferred the present appeal challenging the order and decree dated 01.03.2023 passed in M.V.O.P.No.890 of 2016 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru, wherein the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.15,59,124/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Fifty Nine Thousand One Hundred and Twenty Four only) to the claimants, though the claim petition was originally filed for Rs.10,00,000/-, on account of the death of the deceased, Vaddali Sunil Kumar, in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 11.02.2015.

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

03. The case of the claimants, in brief, is as follows:

a) On 11.02.2015 at about 8.00 p.m., while the deceased was returning from Bhimavaram to Undi on a Yamaha motorcycle along with a pillion rider, Chelluboina Ramesh Reddy an RTC bus bearing No.AP 29 Z 0657, which came in the opposite direction and was driven by the 1st respondent in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the motorcycle of the deceased near the Milk Centre, NRP Agraharam. As a result, the deceased and the pillion rider fell on the road. The deceased, having sustained a severe head injury as well as other bleeding injuries all over his body, died on the spot. The Station House Officer, Undi Police Station, West Godavari District registered a case in Crime No.29 of 2015 under Sections 304-A and 338 of IPC against the 1st respondent and filed a charge sheet. The accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the 1st respondent and the vehicle is owned by the 2nd respondent. Therefore, the respondents 1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation to the petitioners.

04. The claimants contended before the Tribunal that the 1st petitioner is the wife, the 2nd petitioner is the son, and the 3rd petitioner is the father of the deceased. The deceased was working in a finance company as a purchaser and seller of motor vehicles and was earning Rs.10,000/- per month. Therefore, they sought compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- from the respondents.

05. Before the Tribunal, the 1st respondent remained exparte.

06. The 2nd respondent/APSRTC filed a written statement denying the allegations made in the petition and contended that the accident occurred as the deceased drove the motorcycle at high speed in a careless, rash, and negligent manner and attempted to overtake a lorry without observing the bus coming in the opposite direction. Though the 1st respondent stopped the bus upon noticing the deceased approaching at high speed on his motorcycle and attempting to overtake the lorry, the deceased could not control the motorcycle and dashed against the bus. Thus, there was