The Tsrtc, Musheerabad vs Bari China Biksham Biksham
2022 Latest Caselaw 5167 Tel

     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

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

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.

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.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

_______________________ JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI 18.10.2022 Tsr/pss