THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

JUDGMENT:

This appeal is filed by the appellant-Insurance Company under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Award and decree passed by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal- cum-XII Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, (hereinafter referred to ‘learned Tribunal’) in M.V.O.P.No.305 of 2015, dated 24.02.2020, wherein claimant filed the claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by the respondents herein in a motor vehicle accident that took place on

16.12.2014.

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 appellant/claimant filed M.V.O.P.No.305 of 2015 under Section 166 of the M.V.Act, 1988 seeking compensation for the injuries received in bike accident alleged to have caused due to rash and negligent manner by the rider of another bike bearing No.AP-28-M-3280. It is contended that on 16.12.2014, the petitioner while going to Medchal town after completing his work, from Kandlakoya on his bike bearing No.AP-28- BT-7097, on the way one bike bearing No.AP-28-M-3280 came in high speed in rash and negligent manner and dashed to petitioner’s bike, as a result, the petitioner fell down on the ground and sustained fracture and grievous injuries all over the body. The petitioner was taken to Balaji Hospital at Pet Basheerbad, Secunderabad for treatment. The Police registered a case in Crime No.518 of 2014 against the rider of bike bearing No.AP-28-M-3280

4. The contention of the petitioner before the learned Tribunal was prior to the accident, the petitioner was hale and healthy and was working as an operator in INBISCO India Limited Company and was drawing salary of Rs.10,000/-. Due to the accident the petitioner was completely bedridden and was unable to do his work and suffered 45% of disability as per Ex.A7 issued by Medical Board and cannot sit in normal position, sit with cross legs and squat. The petitioner/claimant claimed an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- as compensation for the said accident under various heads.

5. Before the learned Tribunal, respondent Nos.1-Owner-cum- Driver remained ex-parte. Respondent No.2 – IFFCO Tokyo 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 petitioner and contended that the accident occurred due to self negligence of the petitioner and the compensation claimed is excessive and prayed to dismiss the claim petition.

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

“i) Whether the injured S.Naga Raju(petitioner) sustained injuries in – S.Naga Raju(petitioner) sustained injuries in motor vehicle accident and whether such accident was occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the motor bike bearing No.AP-28M 3280?

ii) Whether the petitioner is entitled for any compensation? If so, at what quantum and what is the liability of the respondents?

iii) To what relief?

7. 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 petition and come to a conclusion that the petitioners would be entitled for an compensation award of Rs.15,09,824/- along with interest @ 7.5 % per annum.

8. 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 claimant did not possess any valid and effective driving license to drive the motor cycle as on the date of accident and the petitioner is responsible for the accident and the Tribunal did not consider the contributory negligence on the part of the petitioner. It is further conten