Apsrtc, Rep By Its Md, Hyderabad ... vs Nargis Fatima, Hyderabad
2022 Latest Caselaw 6444 Tel

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.

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

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

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