THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY M.A.C.M.A.No.253 of 2019

JUDGMENT:

This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant challenging the award dated 31.10.2018 passed in M.V.O.P.No.156 of 2015 by the learned Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-VI Additional District Judge, Siddipet (for short “the Tribunal”), whereby the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.8,13,000/-, but restricted the same to Rs.4,06,500/- after deducting 50% on the ground of contributory negligence.

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

3. The case of the claimant is that on 05.08.2015, while he was proceeding on his motorcycle bearing No. AP 23 AL 9829 and was waiting at Milan Garden X Roads connecting Rajeev Rahadari to cross the road, a car bearing No.AP 15 BB 7495, coming from Hyderabad towards Karimnagar, driven at high speed in a rash and negligent manner, came onto the wrong side of the road and dashed against his motorcycle, causing grievous injuries. It is stated that claimant was treated at Yashoda Hospital, Secunderabad, as inpatient from 06.08.2015 to 27.08.2015 and he claimed Rs.13,00,000/- as compensation.

4. Before the Tribunal, respondent Nos.1 and 2, driver and owner of the car, remained ex parte. The 3^rdrespondent–insurance company filed a counter denying the manner of accident and the liability.

5. On considering the evidence of PWs.1 to 3 and Exs.A1 to A15, the Tribunal held that the accident was caused by the rash and negligent driving of the car and also attributed contributory negligence to the claimant. It assessed the total compensation at Rs.8,13,000, but reduced it to Rs.4,06,500 by deducting 50%

towards contributory negligence.

6. Heard learned counsel for the both sides and perused the record.

7. The learned counsel for the appellant/claimant contended that the finding ofcontributory negligence is erroneous and contrary to the evidence on record. It is further contended that Ex.A1-FIR and Ex.A2-scene of offence panchanama clearly establish that the accident occurred while the claimant was waiting beside the road and the car came onto the wrong side and hit the motorcycle. There was no evidence adduced by the insurance company to show that the claimant contributed to the accident.

Hence, the Tribunal ought to have awarded the entire compensation without deduction.

8. On the other hand, the learned counsel for Insurance Company supported the impugned award and prayed to dismiss the appeal.

9. The evidence of P.W.1, coupled with Ex.A1-FIR and Ex.A2- scene of offence panchanama, makes it clear that the car bearing No. AP 15 BB 7495, driven at high speed in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the claimant who was waiting beside the road. The driver of the car was charge-sheeted for offences under Section 338 IPC. No material is placed by the insurance company to establish contributory negligence on the part of the claimant. The Tribunal erred in assuming contributory negligence without any supporting evidence. Hence, the finding to that extent is set aside.

10. The Tribunal has taken into consideration six grievous injuries suffered by the claimant, the treatment in Yashoda Hospital for 22 days, and medical bills totaling Rs.6,37,127/-. It rightly awarded Rs.25,000/- for each of the six grievous injuries, Rs.6,37,127/- towards medical expenses, and Rs.25,000/- towards transportation, aggregating to Rs.8,13,000/-. The said computation is reasonable and does not warrant interference. Therefore, the claimant is entitled to the entire compensation of Rs.8,13,000/- without any deduction towards contributory negligence.The rate of interest at 7.5% per annum awarded by the Tribunal from the date of petition till realization is just and proper. 11. In the result, this appeal is partly allowed and the impugned award dated 31.10.2018 passed in M.V.O.P.No.156 of 2015 by the Tribunal is modified by setting aside the finding of contributory negl