THE HON’ BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA M.A.C.M.A. No.315 of 2019 And CROSS OBJECTIONS No.52 of 2019

COMMON JUDGMENT:

MACMA No.315 of 2019 is filed by the insurance company against the Order dated 15.10.2018 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal – cum – I Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, at Secunderabad, in M.V.O.P. No. 631 of 2016. By the impugned Order, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.14,13,700 to the claimant/injured, with proportionate costs and interest at 7.5% per annum, holding respondent No.2 (driver of the crime vehicle), and respondent No.3 (insurer of the crime vehicle) jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.

1.1 The claimant filed Cross-Objections No.52 of 2019, dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation.As the matters arise out of the same impugned order, they were heard together and taken up for common disposal. For convenience of reference, the parties will be referred to as the claimant and the insurance company.

2. Brief facts of the case, so far as relevant for dealing with these appeals, are that on 09.10.2016, at around 8:00 PM, the claimant (Mr. Ravi Nakkala), was proceeding from Sadashivpet Village to Narmetta Village in Warangal District, on his Hero Honda Splendor motorcycle (bearing No.AP- 36P-2270) and when he reached near Peddamma Temple at Bachannapet Village, a Glamour motorcycle (bearing No.TS-03-EB-2645) coming behind the claimant’s motorcycle, and driven by its rider in a rash and negligent manner, dashed into the motorcycle of the claimant, causing the accident, and the claimant fell down and sustained grievous injuries.

2.1 PW-2, Ganti Mahesh, testified before the Tribunal with regard to occurrence of accident. The Tribunal, after considering the oral evidence of PWs.1 to 7 and documents Ex.A1 to A31 and Ex.X1 to Ex.X6 adduced on behalf of the claimant; and the oral evidence of RW.1 and documents Ex,.B1 to B3 adduced on behalf of the insurance company, passed the impugned Order dated 15.10.2018 awarding compensation of Rs.14,13,700 with interest at 7.5% per annum, holding respondent No.2 (owner of Glamour motorcycle bearing No.TS-03-EB-2645) and respondent No.3 (insurer of Glamour motorcycle) jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.

2.2 Aggrieved by the Order dated 15.10.2018, the insurance company filed MACMA No.315 of 2019, and the claimant filed Cross Objections No.52 of 2019.

3. Heard Mr. V. Sambasiva Rao, learned counsel for the insurance company; and Mr. Akkam Eshwar, learned counsel for the claimant. Perused the record.

4. Learned counsel for the insurance company essentially contends that the insured vehicle (TS 03 ED 2645) was not involved in the accident that allegedly occurred on 09.10.2016 at 8:30 PM; that the injured claimant was actually riding a different vehicle — Motor Cycle No. AP 36 P 2270 — which skidded, leading to self-inflicted injuries; that the insured vehicle was fraudulently planted as the accident vehicle, in collusion with the police and the vehicle owner, to claim compensation from the insurer; that the claimant deliberately suppressed crucial medical documents — specifically Ex.B.2: Medico Legal Record dated 10.10.2016 (Yashoda Hospital) and Ex.B.3:

Injury Certificate dated 02.12.2016 (Yashoda Hospital), and these records clearly state that the injuries were due to a "two-wheeler skid", and not due to a collision or third-party vehicle involvement; that the alleged eyewitness (PW2) admitted in cross-examination that he did not report the accident to the police; that this undermines the credibility of PW2 and presence at the accident scene, suggesting he did not witness the accident but was brought in to support the false claim; that the hospital entry, made by the injured’s brother (Karunakar), clearly mentions a two-wheeler skid accident, and this hospital entry contradicts the later claim that another vehicle (i.e., the insured vehicle) was involved, further highlighting fabrication; that the Tribunal awarde