THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA M.A.C.M.A.No.124 of 2020 & X-OBJ.No.11 of 2020

COMMON JUDGMENT:

This M.A.C.M.A.No.124 of 2020 is filed by the Road Transport Corporation and Cross Objections are filed by the claimants against the Award and decree, dated 21.08.2018 passed in M.V.O.P.No.230 of 2017 by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-the Court of the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’).

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 the claimants, who are the parents of one Chiragani Satheesh (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”), have filed a claim-petition for grant of compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- for the death of the deceased, who died in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 27.12.2016. It is stated that on 27.12.2016, while the deceased was proceeding on his motorcycle bearing No.TS 08 EM 1078 from Dilsukhnagar to L.B.Nagar and when he reached opposite to D.Mart at L.B.Nagar, the driver of RTC bus bearing No.AP 37 Z 0097 drove it in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the deceased from his backside, due to which he sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot.

4. Basing on a complaint, the Police, L.B.Nagar, registered a case in Crime No.1450 of 2016 against the driver of the RTC bus, for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of I.P.C.

5. It is further stated that the deceased was aged about 20 years at the time of the accident and used to earn Rs.10,000/- per month as motorcycle mechanic and on account of the death of the deceased, the claimants, who have depended on the income of the deceased, have lost their source of income. Hence, they filed the claim-petition against the respondents, who being the owners of the said R.T.C. bus are liable to pay the compensation.

6. The respondents filed counter denying the averments made in the claim-petition such as the manner in which the accident took place, age, income and occupation of the deceased. It is specifically stated that on 27.12.2016 at 9:30 p.m. while the driver of the bus was proceeding from K.P.H.B.Colony to Eluru and reached Kothapeta near L.B.Nagar, the police came and stopped the bus by saying that the driver of the bus caused accident near D-Mart, Dilsukhnagar and asked the driver to come to P.S. though the driver of the bus denied the said allegations. Therefore, it is specifically contended that no accident was occurred on that date and the respondents are not liable to pay the compensation.

7. Basing on the above pleadings, the learned Tribunal framed the following issues:-

1. Whether the pleaded accident had occurred resulting in death of deceased Chirangani Satheesh due to the rash and negligent driving of RTC bus bearing No.AP 37 Z 0097 by its driver?

2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to any compensation and if so, at what quantum and what is the liability of the respondents?

3. To what relief?

8. Before the Tribunal, on behalf of the claimants, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A1 to 17 were marked. On behalf of the respondents, neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced.

9. After considering the contents of the claim-petition, counter filed by the respondents and evaluating the oral and documentary evidence produced by the claimants, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the RTC bus and allowed the M.V.O.P in part and granted compensation of Rs.7,20,400/- together with costs and interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization payable by the respondents jointly and severally.

10. Being aggrieved by the said quantum of compensation and liability, the present appeal is filed by the Road Transport Corporation on the following grounds:-

(i) that the Tribunal erred in awarding excess and exorbitant amount without following the principles and procedure