THE HON’ BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA M.A.C.M.A Nos.674 and 2360 of 2019

COMMON JUDGMENT:

These are cross-appeals filed against the Award dated 30.11.2018 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Principal District Judge) at Nalgonda, in M.V.O.P.No.380 of 2017. By the impugned Award, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.8,89,000 with proportionate costs and interest at 7% per annum from the date of claim petition to the date of actual payment, holding the respondents No.1 to 3 (i.e., driver, owner, and insurer of the offending Lorry bearing No.MH-13R-4143), jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.

1.1 Challenging the Award on the grounds of contributory negligence, interested witness, and no-evidence of income of the deceased, the respondent No.3-United India Insurance Company Limited filed MACMA No.674 of 2019. On the contrary, dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimants filed MACMA No.2360 of 2019.As the appeals are connected, they are being disposed through this Common Judgment. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred as insurance company, and claimants.

2. Heard Mr. V. Sambasiva Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the insurance company; and Mr. P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the claimants. Perused the record.

3. Brief facts of the case, as per the claim petition, are that on 04.04.2017, the deceased went to Vibhalapuram village for collection of Milk, and was returning from there to go to Mamillagudem village on his TVS XL motorcycle. When he was crossing the road, a Lorry bearing No.MH-13R- 4143 coming from Suryapet side and proceeding towards Khammam, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the deceased; as a result, the deceased fell down and sustained serious head injury and multiple injuries all over the body and died instantaneously.

3.1 The Police, Mothey Police Station, registered a case in Crime No.43 of 2017, against the driver of the offending Lorry, for the offence punishable under Sections 304-A IPC.

3.2 The claimants filed a Claim petition before the Tribunal, claiming a compensation of Rs.10,00,000 for the death of the deceased in the said accident, payable by respondents No.1 to 3. They claimed that the deceased used to earn Rs.2,50,000 from agriculture, apart from Rs.8,000 per month from the milk business. The Tribunal, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the respective parties, passed the impugned Award, granting a compensation of Rs.8,89,000 with proportionate costs, and interest at 7% per annum, holding respondents No.1 to 3 jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. Aggrieved by the same, these appeals are filed by the insurance company, and claimants.

4. Learned counsel for the insurance company essentially contends that there was no driving license produced by the claimants in respect of the deceased and therefore the deceased had no valid driving license which means he does not know how to ride the motorcycle and therefore there was contributory negligence on the part of the deceased. Further, the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.8,000 per month in the absence of any supporting evidence to that effect. It is contended that interest rate at 7% per annum is excessive. Further, the Tribunal ought to have deducted 1/3^rd towards personal expenses rather than 1/4^th as claimants No.2 and 4 are major and married daughter of the deceased and therefore not dependents. Further, PW-2 who is an eye witness is an interested witness and he did not lodge an FIR with the police after witnessing the accident, and therefore the learned Standing Counsel contends that the impugned Award is not in accordance with the settled principles of law.

5. Learned counsel for the claimants, on the other hand, essentially contends that the Tribunal ought to have assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.10,000 per month; that the Tribunal did not grant amount towards