THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

COMMON JUDGMENT:

M.A.C.M.A is filed by the RTC, aggrieved by the Order and Decree dated 29.08.2019 in M.V.O.P.No.999 of 2015 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Special Sessions Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs and STs (POA) Act, 1989-cum-VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B.Nagar (for short “the Tribunal”). Cross Objection No.60 of

2023 is filed by the claimants.

2. For convenience and clarity, the parties herein are referred to as they were arrayed before the Tribunal.

3. The case of the petitioners before the Tribunal is that on 02.02.2015 at about 07.00 P.M., Borra Jangaiah @ Jagan along with his daughters viz., Sravanthi, Keziya and Vinjamuri Vijay were proceeding towards Polepally village to attend the function of relatives from Balapur Village on his bike bearing No. AP-29-BG- 5802 and when they reached near Suchira Dhaba, Ibrahmipatnam at about 07.00 P.M., in the mean time, the driver of the CBZ bike bearing No.AP-29-BM-6482 drove his vehicle in a rash and negligent manner at a high speed and dashed the bike of the deceased in opposite direction due to which the deceased and his daughters fell on the road and at the same time the RTC bearing No.AP-29Z-2589 which was proceeding from Ibrahimpatnam to Yacharam, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner ran over the fallen people, as a result Jangaiah died on the spot while his two daughters sustained fracture injuries. It is their case that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the bike and also due to rash and negligent driving of the RTC bus driver bus bearing No.AP-29Z-2589 and thus claimed compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-.

4. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 remained ex parte before the Tribunal.

5. Respondent No.3- the driver of the RTC bus has filed counter denying the age, occupation and earnings of the deceased and also the occurrence of the accident. It is his contention that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the rider of the CBZ motor bike.

6. Respondent No.4 filed counter denying the averments of the petition and they further contended that the accident has not occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver and that their bus is not involved in the accident. It is their contention that while the bus was moving, the driver heard the noise and after hearing the said noise, he stopped the bus and got down and verified the reason for the said sound and then he found that the deceased fell down from the motor bike while overtaking the bus without precautionary measures at a high speed and colluded with another motor bike and fell down. Thus their contention is that there was no negligence of the bus driver in occurrence of the accident.

7. Based on the above rival pleadings, the Tribunal has framed the following issues:-

1. Whether the deceased/B.Jangaiah @ Jagan died in the accident occurred on 02.02.2015, due to contributory negligence on the part of both vehicles i.e., RTC bus bearing No.AP-29Z-2589 and CBZ bike bearing No.AP-29 Z-2589 and CBZ bike bearing No.AP-29-BM-

6482?

2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to any compensation, if so, from whom and what amount?

3. To what relief ?

8. At the time of trial, petitioners got examined P.Ws.1 and 2, got marked Exs.A.1 to A.6. No evidence was adduced on behalf of the respondents.

9. Based on the evidence on record, the Tribunal has granted an amount of Rs.14,50,000/- towards compensation. Aggrieved by the said Order and Decree dated 29.08.2019, the present M.A.C.M.A is filed by the RTC.

10. Heard Sri R. Anurag, learned Standing Counsel for TSRTC and Sri Jagathpal Reddy Kasi Reddy, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

11. Learned Standing Counsel for TSRTC submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error in awarding Rs.14,50,000/- towards compensation, fastening the liability against RTC. He argued that the Tribunal ought to have appreciated the fact that the accident occurre