IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE JUSTICE B.R. MADHUSUDHAN RAO DATED THE 22^nd DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 Between:

Smt.P.Susheela, W/o P.Srisailam … Appellant-petitioner And

1. The General Manager, APSRTC.

2. The Depot Manager, APSRTC.

... Respondents-Respondents

JUDGMENT:

1. This Memorandum of Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, ‘the MV Act, 1988’) assailing the Award passed by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge for the Trial of Communal Offence Cases-cum-VII Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge Red Hills, Nampally, Hyderabad, in M.V.O.P.No.1407 of 2003 dated

01.03.2006.

2.1. Appellant is the petitioner and respondents are the respondents in the O.P.

2.2. Appellant-petitioner is the daughter of the deceased R.Jangamma.

3.1. Appellant-petitioner has filed claim petition under Section 166 of the M.V.Act claiming compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for the death of R.Jangamma from the date of filing the petition till the date of realization against respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severally.

3.2. It is stated in the petition that R.Jangamma and others were proceeding in an Auto bearing No.AP13/V5481 from Hyderabad towards Ibrahimpatnam side, when the Auto reached near Injapur village bridge, one RTC bus bearing No.AP10Z9418 of Macherla Depot came in a rash and negligent manner on extreme side of the road and dashed the Auto in opposite direction, due to which the auto was dragged to some distance. The auto was damaged and the inmates of the auto fell down and sustained grievous injuries.

R.Jangamma and two others died on the spot.

3.3. As on the date of accident, deceased R.Jangamma was aged about 50 years, was working as labourer, earning Rs.3,000/- per month. On the complaint, PS Vanasthalipuram registered a case in Crime No.452 of 2002, against the driver of the RTC Bus and prayed to allow the O.P.

4. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 have filed common written statement opposing the claim of the appellant-petitioner contending that the accident did not occur due to rash and negligent manner in high speed as alleged by the appellant- petitioner. On 08.09.2003, bus bearing No.AP10Z9418 was coming from Macherla to Hyderabad, when it reached near Injapur bridge and was negotiating the upgradient road, it was found that one Tata Sumo followed by 7 seater auto with 11 passengers was coming in opposite direction. While the said bus was negotiating the Tata Sumo 7 seater, the auto came to the middle of the road. All of a sudden, to overtake the same, the bus was taken to the left margin of the road and was stopped. The speedy auto came to the extreme right side of the road and hit the front portion of the bus. The accident has occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the 7 seater auto. The driver of the RTC Bus was prosecuted without any basis on the false complaint and the claim made by the appellant-petitioner is excessive and prayed to dismiss the O.P.

5. Learned Tribunal has framed the following issues.

i. Whether the accident took place on 08.09.2002 at about

14-15 hrs due to rash and negligent driving of APSRTC Bus bearing No.AP10Z9418 by its driver?

ii. Whether the petitioner is entitled to claim compensation from the respondents? If so, to what amount and from whom?

iii. To what relief?

6. Appellant-petitioner is examined as PW1, also examined PW2-G.Claramma and got marked Exs.A1 to A5. Respondents have got examined RW1-Brahmmam.

7. Learned Tribunal after analyzing the evidence adduced by the parties coupled with the documents marked thereon has partly allowed the O.P and awarded compensation of Rs.1,22,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of deposit holding that respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner submits that the learned Tribunal failed