THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI

JUDGMENT:

1. Aggrieved by the Judgment passed by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal –cum- III Additional District Judge, Asifabad (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) in O.P.No.121 of 2016, dated 20.07.2017, the 3rd respondent/Insurance Company in the said O.P. preferred the present Appeal seeking to set-aside the order of the learned Tribunal

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

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, who is an injured, filed a petition under Section 166 (1)(c) & 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation of Rs.5,89,151/- for the injuries sustained by him in a road accident that occurred on 22.03.2016. As stated by the petitioner/injured, on 22.03.2016, when he was proceeding on motorcycle bearing No.AP- 01-AF-7655 as a pillion rider and when reached Vinay Garden of Kaghaznagar at about 7.00 p.m., a Tata Magic Auto bearing No.AP- 01-TV-3649, which was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner at high speed, dashed the motorcycle of the petitioner. As a result, the rider of the motorcycle died on the spot and the petitioner sustained Head injury and other injuries all over body. Immediately, he was taken to Government Hospital, Sirpur Town and after First Aid, he was taken to Government Hospital at Mancherial and later took treatment in Sunrise Hospital, Karimnagar and was admitted in Star Hospital, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, as inpatient for a period of 1 week and after undergoing surgery, he was again admitted in the same Hospital for a period of 4 days.

4. It is stated by the petitioner/injured that he was aged 24 years and was working as daily wage earner apart from doing cultivation and used to earn Rs.12,000/- per month. Due to fracture injuries sustained by him in the alleged accident, he is suffering from acute pain and unable to attend his daily work and hence filed claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.5,89,151/- against the respondents, who are the driver, owner and insurer of subject Tata Magic Auto bearing No.AP-01-TV-3649 involved in the accident.

5. Before the Tribunal, respondent Nos.1 & 2/driver and owner of the crime Tata Magic Auto bearing No.AP-01-TV-3649 remained ex-parte. Respondent No.3/Insurance Company filed its counter contending that the petitioner/injured has to be prove his age, occupation, loss of income due to the alleged accident and also contended that respondent No.1 was not having valid driving license to drive the crime vehicle at the time of accident and thereby violated the terms and conditions of insurance policy. As such, respondent No.3 is not liable to pay compensation and that the compensation claimed is excess and exorbitant and hence, prayed to dismiss the claim against it.

6. Based on the above pleadings, the learned Tribunal had framed the following issues:-

i. Whether the petitioner sustained injuries in the accident that occurred on 22.03.2016 at about 19.00 hours at Vinay Garden of Kaghaznagar?

ii. Whether the said accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of Tata Magic Auto bearing No.AP-01-TV-3649?

iii. Whether the petitioner is entitled to claim compensation? If so, how much and against which of the respondents?

iv. To what relief?

7. Before the Tribunal, the petitioner/injured examined himself as PW1, got examined PW2-Doctor and got marked Exs.A1 to A13 on his behalf. As respondent Nos.1 & 2 remained ex-parte, on behalf of respondent No.3, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced.

8. After considering the evidence and documents available on record, the learned Tribunal had partly-allowed the claim petition by awarding a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- towards compensation along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit payable by all the respondent Nos.1 to 3 jointly and severally. Aggrieved by the same, the 3^rd respondent/Insurance Company in the said O.P. pref