THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G. PRIYADARSINI
M.A.C.M.A. No.756 of 2017
JUDGMENT :
This appeal is filed by the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (presently, Telangana State Road Transport Corporation) aggrieved by the order and decree dated 06.07.2015 in O.P.No.2229 of 2008 on the file of the I Additioinal Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-XV Additional Chief Judge- cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short, 'the tribunal').
2. On 31.08.2008, while the deceased Syed Qursheed Ali, the husband of claimant, was proceeding in an auto as driver, from Madhina towards Bahadurpur, when the auto reached opposite CRPF gate, the offending vehicle i.e., bus bearing No. AP 28Z 2685, owned by the respondents, appellants herein, being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the auto. As a result, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. Therefore, the claimant laid the claim for Rs.5.00 lakhs towards compensation against the respondents. 2
MGP, J MACMA.No.756 of 2017
3. The Tribunal, on examining the oral and documentary evidence on record, partly allowed the O.P. awarding a total compensation of Rs.3,72,000/- along with costs and interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization, to be deposited within two months from the date of said order. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant-RTC has filed this appeal.
4. Heard both sides and perused the record.
5. The learned Standing Counsel for the appellant contends that the order and decree of the Tribunal is contrary to law, weight of evidence and probabilities of the case; that the Tribunal has not considered the relationship of the claimant with the deceased as there was no proof to show that she is the wife of the deceased. Therefore, the learned Standing Counsel prayed for setting aside the impugned order in the O.P.
6. As seen from the record, earlier the matter was remanded from this Court to the tribunal for deciding issue No. 2 after permitting the claimant to adduce evidence with regard to her legal heirship with the deceased. On such remand, the claimant filed Exs. A.4 to A.6, which are copies of charge sheet, Post-Mortem 3 MGP, J MACMA.No.756 of 2017 Examination Report and Ration Card. The ration card shows the name of the claimant as Nargis Fatima, as wife of Syed Quresheed Ali Abedi. Even P.W.2, the daughter of the claimant stated before the Court that she does not have any objection if the compensation is granted to the claimant, as she is not depending on the earnings of the deceased. So also, P.W.3, one of the sons of deceased, stated in similar lines. Thus, considering these evidence, the tribunal has held that the claimant is the wife of the deceased and she is entiteld for the compensation. Except the relationship of the claimant with the deceased, the learned Standing Counsel has not seriously disputed the qauantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal. For the reasons discussed above, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order and decree, warranting interference by this Court.
7. The appeal is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________________ JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI Date: 05.12.2022 tsr 4 MGP, J MACMA.No.756 of 2017 THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G. PRIYADARSINI M.A.C.M.A. No.756 of 2017 DATE: 05-12-2022