The Court made the following:

JUDGMENT:

1. This Motor Accident Claims Miscellaneous Appeal (for short MACMA) has been preferred by the Appellant/3rd Respondent - M/s. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, represented by its Divisional Manager, Near Vinayaka Theatre, Eluru Road, Vijayawada, challenging the Order/Award and Decree passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short MACT) –cum- I Additional District Judge, Srikakulam, in M.V.O.P.No.153 of 2018 dated 07.04.2023 awarding an amount of Rs.7,19,600/- as against the claim of Rs.8,00,000/-. For the sake of convenience and to avoid confusion, the parties herein after are referred to as they were arrayed before the Tribunal i.e., Appellant herein as 3rd respondent, Respondents No.1 to 4 herein as Petitioners/claimants, Respondents No.5 and 6 herein as Respondents No.1 and 2.

2. The Petitioners being wife, children and mother of Meruva Venkateswara Rao filed claim petition in M.V.O.P.No.153 of 2018 under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- together with interest and costs for the death of Meruva Venkateswara Rao in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 25.07.2017.

3. Brief averments of the claim petition in MVOP No.153 of 2018 are that: Meruva Venkateswara Rao (hereinafter referred to as the “deceased”) was aged about 30 years, hale and healthy, was doing agricultural work and earning Rs.10,000/- per month

i. On 25.07.2017 at about 7.00 A.M., the deceased went to Epuru village for agricultural work on his motorcycle and after completion of the same, he was returning to the village. At about 1.00 P.M., when he reached near Bridge of Eepuru Village, a lorry bearing No.AP-31T-8253 came in opposite direction driven by the 1st Respondent in a rash / negligent manner and dashed the motorcycle of the deceased, as a result of which, he fell down and received multiple injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to Government Hospital, Kolluru, from there he was shifted to Government Hospital, Tenali, from there shifted to Lalitha Hospital, Guntur, where the deceased treated for four days as inpatient and on 28.07.2017 he was shifted to Government General Hospital, Guntur. While undergoing treatment, he was succumbed to injuries on 31.07.2017 at about 3.45 P.M.

ii. Based on the complaint, a case was registered in Cr.No.57/2017 Kolluru Police station for the offence punishable under Section 337 IPC and after receipt of death intimation, altered Section of law into Section 304-A IPC.

iii. The accident occurred due to rash/negligent driving of the driver – 1st respondent, 2nd respondent being owner and 3rd respondent being insurer of the vehicle, all are liable to pay compensation to the petitioners.

4. The 1st respondent filed written statement contending that the compensation claimed by the petitioners is highly excessive and exorbitant. The 1st respondent is the driver of the lorry bearing No.AP-31T-8253 and there was no rash / negligent driving on the part of the driver of the lorry. The driver of the crime vehicle has valid driving licence and the vehicle insured with the 3rd respondent. If any liability arose, that is purely against the 3rd respondent and owner of the vehicle. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.

5. 2nd respondent filed written statement contending that the compensation claimed by the petitioners is highly excessive and exorbitant. The 2nd respondent is the owner of the lorry bearing No.AP-31T-8253 and there was no rash / negligent driving on the part of the driver. The driver of the crime vehicle had valid driving licence and the vehicle was insured with 3rd respondent. If any liability arises, that is purely against the 3rd respondent. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition, with costs.

6. The 3rd respondent filed written statement contending that the driver of the lorry bearing No.AP-31T-8253 must have valid and effective driving licence to drive the vehicle a