THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA M.A.C.M.A.No.650 of 2020

JUDGMENT:

This appeal is filed by the appellant-Insurance Company under Section 173 of the M.V.Act, against the Award and decree passed by the XXVII Addl.Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad (hereinafter referred to ‘learned Tribunal’) in M.V.O.P.No.347 of 2014, dated 27.01.2020, wherein the Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- to the respondents herein.

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

3. The brief facts of the case are that claimants filed M.V.O.P.No.347 of 2017 under Section 166 of Motor Vehicle Rules 1989 and Rules 455/1B of M.V. Rules, 1989 seeking compensation for the death of the Shaik Sattar Ali (hereinafter referred as ‘deceased’) who died in the accident on 19.05.2016.

4. On 19.05.2016, the deceased was proceeding as pillion rider along with friend on a motor cycle bearing No.TS 09 EQ 4006 from Hyderabad towards Gulbarga with and when they reached near Pepsi Company, Pothireddypally Village, Sangareddy District, the driver of Tractor bearing No. TS 15 UA 8701, Trailer bearing No. TS 15 UA 8700, drove the tractor along with trailer in high speed in a rash and negligent manner from opposite wrong side, lost control over the said tractor and trailer and dashed the deceased motorcycle, due to which the deceased and his friend sustained grievous injuries. The deceased was immediately shifted to Government Hospital, Sangareddy for better treatment from there he was shifted to Gandhi Hospital, Secunderabad, however on 21.05.2016, the deceased was succumbed to injuries. The Police registered a case vide Crime No.122 of 2017 against the driver of the offending vehicle under Section 304-A of IPC. Due to the said accident, the claimants lost their future income, as claimants were dependent upon deceased. The claimants claimed an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- as compensation for the death of the deceased under various heads.

5. The contention of the claimant before the Tribunal, was that as on the date of accident the deceased was aged about 38 years and was working as scrap labourer and used to earn Rs.15,000/- per month. Due to the sudden death of the deceased, the claimants lost their conjugal happiness and lost deceased’s company and the petitioners lost their dependency.

6. Before the learned Tribunal, respondent Nos.1-Driver of offending vehicle and respondent No.2-Owner of the offending vehicle remained ex parte. Respondent No.3 – Cholamandalam M.S.General Insurance Company Limited, filed counter-affidavit, denying all the averments made in the claim petition, including the manner in which the accident took place, age, avocation and income of the deceased and submitted that deceased was not holding valid and effective driving licences and the said vehicles were not road worthy to ply and the compensation claimed is excessive and prayed to dismiss the claim petition.

7. Basing on the pleadings and averments made by both the counsels, the learned Tribunal framed the following issues which reads as under:

“1) Whether the accident occurred was due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by R1?

2) Whether the petitioners are entitled to compensation ? If so, to what extent and from whom?

3) To what relief ?”

8. On behalf of petitioners, PWs.1 and 2 were examined, Ex.A1 to A5 marked. While on behalf of Respondent No.3 reported no oral evidence.

However, Ex.B1-Insruance Policy was marked.

9. After perusing the oral and documentary evidences and going into the entire record and the evidences placed by both the parties, the learned Tribunal allowed the claim in part and granted compensation of Rs.17,12,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum.

10. Being aggrieved by the compensation amount awarded by the learned Tribunal, the present appeal is filed by the appellant/Insurance Company on the ground that the deceased was not holding effective driving