HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY M.A.C.M.A.NO.123 OF 2015

JUDGMENT

Heard learned counsel Sri A.V.K.S.Prasad, learned counsel for the appellant-insurance company and Sri.M.Govind Reddy, learned standing counsel for respondent No.1/claimant.

2. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant-insurance company assailing the award passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-IX Additional District Judge, Wanaparthy (for short, ‘Tribunal’) in O.P.No.305 of 2012, dated 03.06.2014 and thereby for seeking enhancement of compensation.

3. The brief factual matrix of the present appeal is as under:

4. On 09.11.2010 at about 11.00 a.m., while the claimant was proceeding on his motor cycle bearing registration No.AP-22-B- 0968 along with one Shiva as pillion rider and when they reached near Gandhi Chowk towards Degree College, Wanaparthy, a tractor trailer bearing No.AP-22-AB/0743–074 came in rash and negligent manner and dashed to his motor cycle, as a result, himself and pillion rider fell down and petitioner sustained multiple injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to Government Area Hospital, Wanaparthy and thereafter he was shifted to SVS Hospital and from there he was shifted to Gandhi Hospital, where he was treated as inpatient and underwent surgery for removal of left spleen and left kidney. The Police, Wanaparthy Town Police Station registered a case in Crime No.154/2010 against the driver of tractor for the offence under Sections 337 and 338 of IPC.

5. The claimant filed claim petition against the owner of the vehicle and insurance company under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the MACT claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- along with interest on account of injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident.

6. The claimant was aged about 23 years as on the date of accident, hale and healthy and as a bore-well operator apart from doing cultivation and was earning an income of Rs.15,000/- per month and contributing the same for the welfare and maintenance of the family and due to accident, he was suffering with permanent disability and thereby, the petitioner was unable to do any work and lost income source.

7. The respondent No.1, the owner of the crime vehicle remained ex-parte. The 2^nd respondent-Insurance Company filed counter denying the material averments of the claim petition including the age, occupation and earnings of the claimant, the manner of accident and a valid driving license of the claimant to drive the motor vehicle. It was further contended that it was the claimant who was negligent and having lost control of the motor cycle fell down and sustained injuries and suppressing the same, got filed case against the driver of the crime vehicle. Hence, 2nd respondent is not liable to pay compensation.

8. On the basis of the pleadings, the MACT has framed the following issues:

i) Whether the accident dated 09.11.2010 near Jammichettu at Gandhi Chowk of Wanaparthy village was due to the rash and negligent driving of the tractor/trolley bearing registration No.AP-22-AB/0743-074 by its driver and that the petitioner has suffered injuries in that accident ?

ii) Whether the petitioner is entitled to any compensation from the respondents and if so, to what extent and from whom ?

iii) Whether the petitioner/rider himself was negligent in riding the motor cycle and as such he was responsible for the accident ?

iv) To what relief ?

9. In order to substantiate the case, on behalf of the claimant, P.Ws.1 to 4 were examined and Exs.A1 to A15 and Exs.X1 to X3 were marked. The 2^nd respondent-insurance company did not choose to examine any witness, but copy of policy was marked as Ex.B1.

10. The MACT, on due consideration of the evidence and material placed on record, came to conclusion that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the tractor trailer and awarded compensation of Rs.13,41,000/- to the claimant along with interest @ 7.5% per annum. The owner of the vehicle and the Insurance co