THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE M. G. PRIYADARSINI
M.A.C.M.A.Nos.428 of 2019 and 2688 of 2019
COMMON JUDGMENT:
These two appeals are being disposed of by this common
judgment since M.A.C.M.A.No.428 of 2019 filed by the TSRTC
challenging the quantum of compensation and M.A.C.M.A.
No.2688 of 2019 filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of
compensation, are directed against the very same order and
decree, dated 04.09.2018 passed in M.V.O.P.No. 817 of 2006 on
the file of the the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-
cum-I Additional District Judge, Nalgonda (for short "the
Tribunal").
For the sake of convenience, the parties will hereinafter
be referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal.
The facts, in issue, are as under:
The claimants filed a petition under Section 166 r/w
Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the
respondents 1 and 2, claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-
for the death of the deceased-Bari Mangamma, who died in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 07.11.2016. It is 2 stated that on the fateful day, the deceased was travelling on the offending bus and when the bus reached the outskirts of Malkapuram Village, the driver of the bus, respondent No. 2, drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner at high speed and suddenly turned it to right side, as a result of which, the deceased fell down on the road from back door of the bus and sustained head injury apart from other injuries. She died on the way to Hospital near Duppalapally Village at about 2.30 p.m. According to the claimants, the deceased was 46 years, earning a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month working as coolie and therefore, they laid a claim for Rs.10.00 lakhs agains the respondents.
Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 filed counters denying the manner in which the accident took place including the age, avocation and income of the deceased. It is mainly contended that the accident occurred only due to the negligence of the deceased and as such, the respondents are not liable to pay compensation and that the compensation claimed is excessive.
After considering the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal held that the accident was 3 occurred due to the negligent driving of the driver of the RTC bus and accordingly awarded an amount of Rs.9,52,500/-with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization to be paid by the respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally. Challenging the same, the present appeals came to be filed by the Road Transport Corporation and the claimants respectively.
A perusal of the impugned judgment would show that the Tribunal, on issue No.1 as to whether the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of RTC bus bearing No.AP 11 Z 4180, after considering the evidence of P.W.2, who is an eyewitness to the incident, coupled with the documentary evidence, has categorically observed that the accident was occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the RTC bus and has answered in favour of the claimants and against the respondents. Therefore, I see no reason to interfere with the finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending bus.
4
Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the claimants claimed that the deceased was 46 years, doing coolie work and earning Rs.10,000/- per month. In the absence of any proof as to the income of the deceased, considering the avocation of the deceased as 'coolie', the tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/- per month and has rightly added 25% towards future prospcts and thereby fixed the future monthly income at Rs.7,500/-. As there are five dependents, the tribunal was right in deducting1/4th towards personal expenses of the deceased. Since the age of the deceased was mentioned as 46 years in the inquest report as well as Post-Mortem Examination Report, Exs.A.2 & A.3, the tribunal has rightly applied the multiplier '13'. That apart, the tribunal has rightly awarded a sum of Rs.75,000/- under conventional heads. Thus, the amount of Rs.9,52,500/- awarded by the tribunal is just and reasonable and needs no interference by this Court.
In the result, both the appeals fail and the same are accordignly dismissed confirming the compensation fixed by the tribunal. No order as to costs.
5
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_______________________ JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI 18.10.2022 Tsr/pss