THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI AND

COMMON JUDGMENT:

1. These two appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment since M.A.C.M.A.No.1422 of 2017 filed by respondent No.2/Insurance Company in O.P. seeking to set-aside the order passed by the learned Tribunal and M.A.C.M.A.No.1670 of 2017 filed by claimants seeking enhancement of compensation, both are directed against the very same judgment passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal –cum- XXV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in M.V.O.P.No.48 of 2014, dated

26.12.2016.

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

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioners, who are the wife, daughter and mother of Late Donga Rambabu (hereinafter referred to as ‘the deceased’), filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- for the death of the deceased in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 11.07.2013. It is stated by the petitioners that on 11.07.2013 at about 23.00 hours, when the deceased was proceeding on his motorcycle bearing No.AP-29-E-

1319 from Bonguloor Village towards his residence at Sachivalayanagar, Vanasthalipuram and when he reached Brahmanapally cross-roads on Sagar road, one lorry bearing No.AP-16-Y-0779 which was driven by its driver at a high speed in a rash and negligent manner, tried to overtake the motorcycle of the deceased and dashed against him. As a result, the deceased- Rambabu fell down on the road and he sustained grievous injuries to his head and died on the spot.

4. Based on a complaint, police of Vanasthalipuram Police station, registered a case in Crime No.559 of 2013 under Section

304-A IPC against the driver of the alleged lorry.

5. It is stated by the petitioners that at the time of accident, the deceased was aged 33 years, used to run Cool Drinks shop in front of Dhanalaxmi wines, Bonguloor Village and used to earn more than Rs.12,000/- per month and contribute the said earnings towards maintenance of his family. Due to sudden death of the deceased, the petitioners lost their bread winner and were put to hardship and financial crisis. Hence, filed petition claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- from respondent No.1, who is the owner of the offending lorry and respondent No.2/Insurance Company.

6. Respondent No.1/Owner of crime lorry remained ex-parte.

7. Respondent No.2/Insurance Company filed its counter denying the averments made in the claim petition including, manner of accident, involvement of subject Lorry bearing No.AP- 16-Y-0779, rash and negligent driving of the driver of said lorry and further contended that the deceased drove his motorcycle without proper care and due diligence and hit the stationed vehicle and that the claim of compensation is excess and exorbitant and hence, prayed to dismiss the claim against it.

8. Based on the above pleadings, the learned Tribunal had framed the following issues for conducting trial:-

(i) Whether in the pleaded accident, deceased Donga Rambabu died due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of Lorry bearing No.AP-16-Y-0779?

(ii) Whether the petitioners are entitled to compensation? If so, how much and from whom?

(iii) To what relief?

9. Before the Tribunal, on behalf of the petitioners, PWs 1 & 2 were examined and Exs.A1 to A8 and Ex.X1 were marked. On behalf of respondent No.2/Insurance Company, no evidence was adduced, but Ex.B1 copy of Insurance policy was marked.

10. After considering the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the learned Tribunal partly-allowed the claim petition by awarding compensation of Rs.14,71,000/- along with proportionate costs and interest @ 8% per annum from the date of petition till the date of decree and thereafter @ 6% per annum till realization. Challenging the same, the present appeals came to be filed by Insurance Company and the claim petitioners respectively.

11. Heard arg