JUDGEMENT

The petitioners in MVOP.No.307 of 2016 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (for short ‘MACT’) Cum Principal District Judge, Karimnagar, being aggrieved by the judgment and decree in the above referred petition, dated 04-02-2019 by which the learned Chairman, MACT allowed their petition in part and awarded sum of Rs.7,98,000/- as compensation for the death of one Kondaiah in a road traffic accident in spite of their claim for Rs.20,00,000/-, preferred this miscellaneous appeal under Section 173 of M.V. Act and sought for enhancement of the compensation on the following grounds.

2. The tribunal ought to have considered the age of the deceased being 45 years and he being Tody Tapper and also milk vendor could easily earn Rs.12,000/- per month and ought to have considered the oral evidence of PWs.1 to 3, documents marked as Exs.A1 to A8 and could have awarded more compensation. The tribunal ought to have considered that the appellants herein have examined PW.3 through whom Exs.A7 and A8 were marked and evidence was placed before the Court to show that the deceased was the member in the Toddy Tappers Cooperative Society, Irukulla Village and the deceased was earning Rs.15,000/- per month. They have also placed evidence before the Court that deceased used to sell milk in the village, thereby, the Court below could have awarded Rs.20,00,000/- and could not have reduced the compensation.

3. The appellants have also claimed that as per the post-mortem report marked as Ex.A4, the age of the deceased was shown as 45, therefore, the Court below ought to have applied multiplier ‘14’ while assessing the loss of dependency. The Court below did not add any amount towards future prospects, the petitioners while relying on judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in ‘National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others1, sought for enhancement of the compensation. They have also claimed that in view of the death, the children of the deceased lost the parental guidance, protection, affection, thereby the Court 1 16 SCC 680 below ought to have awarded appropriate compensation and prayed for enhancement of the amount.

4. As per the petition filed by the petitioners vide MVOP.No.307 of 2016, it was specifically contended by the appellants that on 20-02-2016, the husband of the first appellant - father of the remaining appellants namely Burra Kondaiah (herein after will be referred as deceased), returned home after selling milk at Durshed Village on his cycle and at about 6.15 a.m., when he reached the house of Mohammed Shabbir on Rajiv Rahadari Road, near Irukulla Bridge, the driver of a Lorry bearing No.AP-27-U-2477 which was coming from Karimnagar drove the same in high-speed, in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the cycle, thereby, the deceased fell down. The Lorry ran over his legs and he received injuries on head, thereby, died on the way while he was shifted to Government Hospital, Karimnagar.

5. The appellants have filed the above said petition against the driver, owner and insurer of the offending vehicle.

The respondents No.1 and 2 i.e., driver and owner of the vehicle filed a common counter denying the material averments and while contending them, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligence of the deceased, sought for dismissal of the petition.

6. The Insurance Company shown as Respondents No.3 and 4, filed a common counter denying its liability on the ground that the first respondent was not having a valid driving license. The second respondent willfully handed over the vehicle to respondent No.1 in spite of his knowledge that respondent No.1 has no driving license and also claimed that the amount of compensation claimed by the appellants is highly excessive. The Court below framed the following three issues:

1. Whether the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving o