THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

JUDGMENT:

This M.A.C.M.A. is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the appellant/petitioner aggrieved by the Award and decree dated 19.11.2019 passed in M.V.O.P.No.316 of 2016 by the Chairman, Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-Cum-II Additional District Judge, Karimnagar at Jagitial, (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) seeking compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by the petitioner in a motor vehicle accident that took place on 24.01.2016.

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

3. The brief fact of the case is that appellant/claimant filed M.V.O.P.No.316 of 2016 under Section 166(1)(a) of the M.V.Act, 1988 seeking compensation for the injuries received in a motor vehicle accident alleged to have caused due to rash and negligent manner by the tipper bearing No.AP 15 X 0567. It is contended that on 24.01.2016, the petitioner was going to his village Gollapalli on his TVS Champ Moped bearing No.AP 15 BJ 4955, when he reached the bypass road, Jagtial, the offending vehicle i.e., tipper lorry bearing No.AP 15 X 0567 came from Daroor Village with high speed in rash and negligent manner and dashed to the petitioner moped due to which the petitioner fell down on the road and the left side front wheel of the tipper ran over on his right hand, thereby the petitioner sustained crush injury and also received injuries on his head, right leg and other parts of the body, thereafter, the petitioner was immediately taken to Gandhi Hospital, Secunderabad and he was admitted as an inpatient on the same day i.e., on 24.01.2016. On the complaint of the nephew of the petitioner, the Police registered a case in Crime No.10 of 2016 for the offence punishable under Section 337 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and filed charge sheet under Section 338 IPC against the driver of the offending vehicle.

4. The contention of the petitioner before the learned Tribunal was that due to accident, the petitioner has to undergone various surgeries, but the fracture was not reunited, due to nuero muscular deficit and the doctors advised for amputation of right hand of the petitioner. The right hand of the petitioner was amputated and skin grafting was done and the petitioner incurred Rs.25,000/- for medicine and for clinical and laboratory tests. The petitioner is said to be suffering with 85% disability due to amputation of his right hand. The further contention of the petitioner before the learned Tribunal is that he was a sheep grower and seller and he was also working as private welder in Hanuman Welding Works at Jagtial and used to earn Rs.20,000/- per month. Due to the said accident and amputation of his right hand, the petitioner was unable to do his day to day works as he was suffering with 85% permanent disability and he was completely debarred from his employment. His employment was terminated, as the petitioner is incapable of discharging his duties because welding is a skilled labor work. As such, the petitioner claims total compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-. Therefore, the respondent Nos.1 & 2 the driver and owner of offending vehicle bearing No.AP-15-X-0567 which was insured by respondent Nos.3 & 4, all of them made jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.

5. Before the learned Tribunal, respondent Nos.1 to 4 filed their counters denying their liability and also 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 further contended that the compensation claimed by the petitioner is excessive and prayed to dismiss the claim petition. Respondent Nos.3 & 4 also submits that respondent No.1 was not holding a valid driving license and the owner of the offending vehicle violated the terms and conditions of policy, hence insurance company not liable to pay any compensation to the petitioner a