HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA M.A.C.M.A. No.1478 of 2019

JUDGMENT:

Being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in the award and decree, dated 23.06.2015 passed in M.V.O.P.No.2771 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short “the Tribunal”), the appellants/claimants preferred the present appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be hereinafter referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal.

3. The facts, in issue, are as under:

The claimants filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- for the death of one Lijo Jacob (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”), who died in a motor vehicle accident. It is stated that on 04.07.2013 at about 15:00 hours while the deceased, along with his friends, was returning from Nagarjun Sagar to Hyderabad in Maruthi Alto Car bearing No.AP 10 BD 5886, when they reached near turning point of Injapur Village, the driver of the Car lost control over the steering on account of his rash and negligent driving, thereby the car was turned turtle and the deceased and his friends have sustained injuries. Immediately after the accident, they were shifted to Gandhi Hospital, Hyderabad, where the deceased was succumbed to injuries. On a complaint, the Police, Vanasthalipuram, registered a case in Crime No.541 of 2013 against the driver of the Car for the offences punishable under Sections 304-A and 337 of IPC. It is also stated that the deceased was hale and healthy and was studying B.Tech 4^th year in Pulla Reddy Engineering College, Wargal, Medak district, and due to the sudden demise of the deceased, the claimants, who are the parents of the deceased have lost their love and affection and also their support. As the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Car, the claimants filed the claim-petition against the respondents 1 and

2, being the owner and insurer of the said Car.

4. Before the Tribunal, the 1^st respondent remained ex parte. The 2nd respondent filed written statement denying the manner in which the accident took place including the age, avocation and income of the deceased. It is also stated that the driver of the Car was not holding valid and effective licence at the time of alleged accident and that the quantum of compensation claimed is excessive and baseless and prayed to dismiss the petition.

5. Basing on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues:-

1. Whether the accident which occurred on

26.01.2014 at about 7:30 a.m. was due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of crime Car bearing No.AP 10 BD 5889 and death of deceased was result of fatal injuries in such accident?

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation and if so, to what quantum and to whom such quantum is recoverable?

3. What relief?

6. On behalf of the claimants, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A1 to A10 and Ex.X1 were marked. On behalf of the respondents, no oral evidence was adduced but Ex.B1-

insurance policy was marked.

7. After considering the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal held that the accident was occurred due to the negligent driving of the driver of the Car and accordingly awarded an amount of Rs.14,21,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization to be paid by the respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally. Challenging the same, the present appeal came to be filed by the claimants seeking enhancement.

8. Learned Counsel for the claimants mainly submits that the Tribunal ought to have taken the age of the deceased not the age of his mother for assessing the loss of dependency in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation and another1. He also submits that as the deceased was having stable income and in view of his ag