Telangana High Court
The Telangana State Road Transport ... vs Donakanti Ashok on 18 December, 2023
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
M.A.C.M.A.NO.890 OF 2023
JUDGMENT:
Heard learned standing counsel Sri Thoom Srinivas for the appellant-TSRTC.
2. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant-TSRTC challenging the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District and Sessions Judge at Nizamabad (for short, 'Tribunal') in M.V.O.P.No.128 of 2019, dated 19.12.2022, thereby seeking to set-aside the award against the TSRTC.
3. The brief factual matrix of the present appeal is as under.
4. On 04.01.2019 at about 9.30 a.m., while the deceased i.e., Donakanti Laxmi and others were travelling in a Car bearing registration No.MH-01-AH-0145 from Vadyat village to Adilabad town, a Bus bearing registration No.AP-28-Z-4382 came in rash and negligent manner with high speed and dashed the Car. Due to said accident, the deceased received multiple fractures to skull, fracture of right side temporal bone, fracture of nasal LNA,J MACMA No.890 of 2023 2 bone and middle temporal bone, fracture of backside and other multiple and grievous injuries to all over the body. Immediately, she was shifted to RIMS Hospital, Adilabad, where she underwent treatment and later she was admitted in Yashoda Hospital, Hyderabad and she underwent treatment as inpatient from 05.01.2019 to 18.01.2019 and later, she was shifted to private hospital, Nizamabad, where she succumbed to injuries on 19.01.2019. The claimants incurred an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- towards treatment, medicines, transportation of dead body. The Police, Mavala P.S., registered a case in Crime No.6/2019 under Section 338 and 304-A IPC against the driver of the offending vehicle and filed charge sheet.
5. The claimants i.e., respondent nos.1 to 3 herein, who are husband and children of deceased, have filed claim petition against appellants under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- along with interest from the date of the petition till the date of deposit.
LNA,J MACMA No.890 of 2023 3
6. The deceased was aged about 45 years as on the date of accident, hale and healthy and was working as washerwoman and doing agriculture and was getting an income of Rs.30,000/- per month and claimants lost the support of the deceased.
7. The appellant-TSRTC filed counter denying all the allegations made in the claim petition and contended that deceased was travelling in the car and seven persons were travelling in the car at the time of accidents, as such, the driver of the car unable to control the car and dashed the bus at middle at "T" junction, while the bus crossed 80% of the road. Thus, the conditions of the insurance policy were violated and finally, prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
8. On the basis of the above pleadings, the Court below framed the following issues:
i) Whether the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of Bus bearing No.AP-28-Z-4382 by its driver causing death of Donakanti Laxmi @ Rajavva?
ii) Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, to what extent and from whom?
iii) To what relief?
LNA,J MACMA No.890 of 2023 4
9. In order to substantiate the case, on behalf of the claimants, P.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.A1 to A9 were marked. On behalf of the TSRTC, RW.1 was examined and did not mark any document on its behalf.
10. The Tribunal on due consideration of the evidence and material placed on record, came to conclusion that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the lorry bearing registration No.AP-28-Z-4382 and awarded compensation of Rs.17,22,939/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit of amount. TSRTC is liable to pay the compensation.
11. During the course of hearing of the appeal, learned counsel for appellant-TSRTC submitted that the Tribunal erroneously decreed the O.P., and erred in believing the evidence of P.W.3. He submitted that there is no negligence on the part of the driver of the bus and therefore, TSRTC is not liable to pay the compensation. He further submitted that Tribunal erred in considering the age of the deceased as 45 without there being any documents. He further submitted that LNA,J MACMA No.890 of 2023 5 Tribunal erred in granting interest @ 7.5% per annum without following the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in T.N.State Transport Corporation Ltd., v. S.Raja Priya and others 1 and finally, prayed to set aside the award passed by the Tribunal.
Consideration :
12. With regard to the main contention of the learned counsel for appellant is that the Tribunal committed irregularity in holding that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of RTC Bus. The Tribunal considered the evidence of eye witness, P.W.3, who deposed that while he along with deceased and others were travelling in a car, the driver of the Bus driven the bus in rash and negligent manner and dashed the car, due to which car turned turtle and went off the road and inmates of the car sustained multiple fractures and grievous injuries and deceased died while undergoing treatment. Further, Police filed Ex.A4-charge sheet, as per which, the Police have examined P.W.3 as eye witness and others and have found that the driver of RTC bus is responsible for the accident and is liable for the offence 1 (2005) 6 SCC 236 LNA,J MACMA No.890 of 2023 6 punishable under Sections 337, 338 and 304-A IPC. Considering the oral evidence adduced by P.Ws.1 and 3, coupled with Exs.A1 to A4, the Tribunal came to conclusion that the driver of RTC bus was responsible for causing the accident in rash and negligent manner.
13. Insofar as the age of the deceased is concerned, as per Ex.A2-copy of inquest panchanama and Ex.A3-copy of PME report, the age of the deceased was shown as 45 years. Considering the same, the Tribunal had rightly considered the age of the deceased as 45 years as on the date of accident.
14. With regard to the quantum of interest awarded, the Hon'ble Supreme Court very recently in the case of Anjali and others vs Lokendra Rathod and others 2 decided on 06.12.2022, had granted interest @ 9% per annum. Therefore, this Court does not find reason to interfere with the interest awarded by the Tribunal. Conclusion:
15. In view of the above discussion and the material placed on record, the appellant failed to make out any case warranting 2 2023(1) ALD 107(SC) LNA,J MACMA No.890 of 2023 7 interference of this Court with the impugned award passed by the Tribunal.
16. In the result, this Appeal stands dismissed. The appellants- TSRTC are directed to deposit the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, duly adjusting the amount already deposited by the appellants. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications if any shall stand closed. [[ __________________________________ LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY,J Date: 18.12.2023 kkm LNA,J MACMA No.890 of 2023 8 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY M.A.C.M.A.NO.890 OF 2023 Date: 18.12.2023 kkm