In a Judgment betrveen Ramkhiladi and Anr v. The tlnited India Insurance Compang Arua the Hon'lcle Supreme Court observed that

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO ]i q,NDIKONDA M.A.C.M.A.No.296 of 2O2O JUDGMENT: This M A C.M.A is filcd undcr section of M.V.Act aga)lrst the A$ arcl arrd de cree passed b_y th,r vlotor Accident Claims Tribunal Cum Additional District Jurlr e , Nizamabad, (hereinafter referrcd to as 'the Tribunal') in NI " O.p.No 208 of

201.1. dal.ecl 1:r I0 20Il ').. Hcard Sri Harinath Reddg Somc., learnr : :ounsel for the appellant in N/IACMA Shriram General Insl :e.nce Companl' Limited and Sri Gajanand Chakrauanthi, lear red coutrsel for the respondents. Pcrused the material on recor:l

3. For the szrke of convenicncc, the parties u i I br: hereinaftcr referred to as they are arrayed belore the learnt:cl l'ribunal 4 . The brief facts of thc case are that c laimants filed M.V.O.P.No.20B of 2014 under Section 163(Ar r f Motor Vehicle Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensatior lcr the cteath of the Kumar Vikas (hercinafter referred as ,deceas :d,) u,ho died in the accident on 29.O9.2O12 2 IV]\IN,J MACMA No.296 oJ 2O2O

5. Brief lacts of the case are that, on 29.09.2012, tll-e deceased along rvith his lriend proceeded to Chichdhari Khanapur village on his friends motor cycle bearing No AP-O 1- TNTR 5989 to attend Vinayaka Nimajjanam and on reaching near culvert at Khanapur village, the vehible skid and the accident was occurred as a result of which deceased and his friend fell down in the vatley and sustarned fracture injuries. Immediately, the deceased was shifted to RIMS Hospital' Adilabad, iater referrcd to H1'derabad, ho$'ever the deceased and alsohisfriendsuccumbedtoinjuries.ThePoliceregistereda casc in Crime No. 123 ol 2012. The claimants claimed an amount of Rs.6,O0,0OO/ - as comPensation.

6. The contention of the clarmants before the Tribunal' was that as on the date of the accident the deceased was al agnculturist and aged about 21 years and earning Rs'20'000/- per month and due to the sudden death of the deceased' the clalmants iost their affectionate son and bread earner and the claimants are deprived of future earning of the deceased and lost their dependencY. T.BeforethelearnedTribunal,respondentNo'1-ownerofthe Crime Vehicle remained ex p-ade' Respondent No'2 - Insurance \ :.ii 3 ,v^R,J I ACMA No.296 oJ 2020 Company Limlted filed counter-affidavit, der f ing a1l the averments made in the claim petition, including he manner in u,l-rich the accident took place, age, avocation arl: income of the deceased and submitted that the due to rasl- :rncl negligent driving of the rider of t1-re offencling motorcycle be. -ing No.AP-O1- TNTR 5989 the self accident occurred and the c1t:' t:ased was not ha\,ing valid driving license to drive the vehir:: and further contended that the compensation claimed is excessive and prayed to dismiss the claim petitron.

8. Basing on the pleadrngs and averments nr I lc b1' both the counsels, the learned Tribunal framed the follou'ir g, issues which reads as under: 1) Wlrcther the accident has takc:tr place due to rash ,1 r ' rLegl4lert dnu ry of the Bojaj Pu|sar beanng No.AP-O1 TN7'R-5989 LL i'.s diuer? ii) Whether tl'Le petlttoners are entitled for compensattorL at (Lccoutlt of death of Kurnbor Vikas. If so, to what dmount and agau -sl rhorn.? iii) To whal reLref

9. To prove the claimants case, PWs.l u'as e,xamined and marked Exs.A1 to A7. RWI was examined or behall of the respondents, and Ex.B 1-lnsurarrce copy was mzul t:d.

10. After perusing the oral and documental t:vidences and after going into the entire record and the evidenc: Jrlaced by both the parties, the learned Tribunal allowed the c:l: rn in part and 4 ]VAR,J MACMA No.296 o! 2o2o granted compensation of Rs.5,O2,OOO/- along with interest (@ 7 .1ok per annum. I 1. Being aggrieved by the compcnsation amount awarded by the learned Tribur-ral, the present appeai is filed bv the appellan t/ Insurance Company on the following among other grounds are that the accident had occurred due to the self negligence of the deceased rider and the deceased fell by skidding from the motor cvcle and submits thal the claimants filed claim petitioner under Section 163(A) of Motor Vehicles Act' 1988, since the decreased borrou'ed the Motor Cycle in question from his friend and drove the oflending Motor Cycle in question in rash and negligent manner and dashed a culvert on the road and died on the spot due to hts owt-t negligence and no other vehicle was involved in the alleged accident axd the deceased \(ras not a third party.

12. Learned counsel for the appellant-lnsurance Company further contended that, as per the settled law, when a person drives a vehicle u'ith the consent of owner of said vehicle, such person for all practical purposes steps into the shoes of the owner and cannot be considered as third party and the Tribunal erred in au,ardin g compensation to the claimants and prays thrs 5 lv.lvR,J It I CMA t;o.296 oJ 2O2O Court to se1-aside the Arnard and Decree passed t. the Tribunal and allou, the prescr-rt appeal.

13. Learned coirnsel for the appellant aiso r:liecl or.t the judsmenfs passed br,' the Hon'ble Supreme Colu.r rL i) National Insntq.nce Compang Limited. u.Shanthi & O1:, r-rst and ii) Deepal Girish Bhai Sony I/s. tlnited Indi t Insurqnce compang2.

11. Learncd cor-rnscl for the rcspondents suI r trts that the Tribunal has r ightl_r awardcd the colx I onsi,rriorL of Rs.5,02,OOO/- b,r, considering the oral an,1 f ocumentan' evidence and the compensation amount awarded l the Tribunal is just and reasonable and needs no interference lr t[i5 es,1p1

15. The clairnan[s have not filed cross-appe : against the Au'ard and decree passed by the Tribunal. As sucl . the claimant decms to be satisfied r.l,ith the Awarcl and clr r rec an,l thc compensation a$ arded by the Tribunal. The orr \ point arose before this Court in this appeal is that: "i) Whether tlte 'fibunal had rightty cons;r e recl the, clatmants petttion f.led under Section 163(4) an; eLuard_ed just compensatrcn to tlrc claimants. ' 2022 ACI 1032 ' 2oo4 (s) scc 385 ,., 6 /VNR,J MACMA No.296 oJ 2O2O ii) Whether the claimants are entitted for the compensatiort in uieu of the seLf rnade accident and self negligence."

16. Admittedly, the deceased died on 29.O9.2012 due to self- accident of the de cease d i.e.. dashing to the culvert and fell dou,n in tl-rc valle-r' and the fact tl'rat no other nrotor vehicle other than the offending motor cycle bearing No. AP 01-TNTR-5989 involved in the accident. Upon perusal of the statement and deposition of Prr'. L, it is stated by the PW. 1 that "At tlte releuant time of the accident, mg deceased son uras dnuing th.e nntor c11cLe" and on perusing the Ex.A 1 -Charge sheet - cum Final Report, the Sub- Inspector ol Police, Aditabad, had cateograllv stated that "when they reached near the Chichdhari Khanctpur, the rider D-2 Kumbar Vikash droue the bike in a rash and negligent manner, due to u.thich D-| ond piLlion rider, D-2 .fell doun in a uaLLeg situated bg the side of road culuert, resulting rtthich theg sustained fatal inluies" and later both succumbed to injuries. Hence, it is clear that deceased rvas riding the motor cycle ald his lriend was pillion rider at the time of the accident.

17. In a Judgment betrveen Ramkhiladi and Anr Vs The tlnited India Insurance Compang & Arua ' the Hon'lcle Supreme Court observed that to claim compensation in a claim r ArR 2o2o sc 527 7 NIYR,J ,1 ,t:MA No.296 oJ 2O2o under Sec. 163(.4) of the MV Act, the deceased l-L: r to be a third partJ' to the policr

18. As per tl-rc jlrdgment of Hon'ble Supr: rrc Cour-t in Ningamma & Anr u. United India Insurar <:e Compang Limtieda, it q,as held that in order to claim corr rensation, the rccipient harcl to be a tl'rrrd party. I[ the driver is t -. ou'ner <.r[ the motor vchrcle or if thc vchicle had been driven a nother, hc *or-rlcl stcp into thc shoes of the owner and tl-t rcfor-c, fl-om a readir-rg of Section L(r3 A, it is clear that the legerl r r:preserrrativc o[ t]-re dcceeLsed are not entitled to compens;i r ()n.' Ancl thc relevant paragraph No. 1B is extracted for ready t'(.1 lrencc '' 18. ht otrr e:ortsklered opirtiotL, the ratio o,'' 'tt, ctfore::ctid decisiorr is cleo.rlq applicable to the focts of ll t t.r:sertl cuse. In the ltresc'rrt cctse, the deceased was not tltt stuner of the rnotorbike hr questiort. He borowed the said r.'' ttorbike Ji'orn its recLl oLunr:r. TLLe deceased cannot be held tc t'<,mplogee of the ouner of the motorbike although he was t'tth.oised to diue the said uehicle by its otuner, and there \ r c', he would step into the shoes of the owner of the motorbikt,. '

19. In the instant case, the deceased is the t i: :r of the crime vehicle bearing No.AP 01 TNTR-5989 and drove rl r, crime vel-ricle in a rash and negligent manner artd the de,:r, ,sed could not ' (2009) 13 SCC 7ro B MACMA No-296 of 2O2O NJVI?,J i control the vehicle and dashed the culvert and fell down in the valle1,, as a result, deceased fel1 down and received fatal injuries on his head and succumbed to injuries. Admittedly, there is no vehicle involved in the accidenL exccpt the olfending vchiclc on n,hrch the deceased n,as travelling. Applying thc principle held by the Supreme Court cited above, thc Insurer is not liable to pay compensation, since deceascd is not a third partl'' AS per the provisions of the M.V. Act, 1988.

20. [n vicu' of above judgments discussed above, it can be safclr concluded that the deceased is t-tot Lhird partS' as he stepped into the shoes of owner and by applying the principle laid dou,n by the Apex Court more Ningamrna & Anr (cited aboue), the lt'rsurer is not Iiable to pav compensation' since deccased is.not a third party as per the provisions of the- M.V Act, 1988

21. On perusal of the policy of the insurance policy, the owner of thc vehicle i.e., respondent No. 1 therein has taken the Personal Accident cover,. for an amount ol Rs.1,00,000/- under the head "P.A.Couer under Section III for Ou.tner - Dnuer : Rs.1,OO,O0O/ -". Accordingly, claimar-lts are entitled for the compe nsation amount of Rs. 1,00,000/ . \ 1 : : I 9 rfivx,J iL CMA No.296 of 2O2O

22. In the result. this M.A.C.M.A. is partly allo$,,1 b1, reducing fhe compcnsation amount from 5,02,00O/- tc, ls. 1,OO,OOO/- (One La-kh rupees ontg/ rvith @ 7.5 % p.a. inertesr fror-n the: date ol pi:tition till tl'rc date of realization. The rt: p,ondcnts dirccted to deposir the arnount together u,ith cosL ; arrd interest after giving due credit to the amount already de;. tsited, i1' any, r,,,ithin a periocl of tu'o months from the receipt o'a cop,r, of this judgrnent. Thc compensation amount shall 1r apportioned amorlg the claimirnts in rhe same manner and r,..o as orciered bv the learnerl Tribirnal. On such deposit, the :ilaimant s arc pernritteC to s ithclrrt*'n the same s'ithout furnisl-r r [i anv sLll.cty

23. Hos'evcr, rt is made clear. il the claimant: have ar,readt, drau n the exccss compensatiolt amount, the r: I tor-tdenl-s are not cntitle d Lo recover the same from the claima I :;. 'lhere, shall be no order ars to costs 24 Miscellar-rcous petitions, if any are pendi r 1. sl-rall stand closcd \ To, //TRUE COPY// SD/- C.DEEPIKA AS S STANT REGISTRAR ---/' 7 SECTION OFFICER

1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Addi onl District & Sessions Judge, Nizamabad. 2 One CC to SRI HARINATH REDDY SOMA, Advocate [ )PUC] 3. One CC to SRI GAJANAND CHAKRAVARTHI, Advoca e: [OPUC] o toj"''::--_*= -*-" :L - :: *E$.":: .!r"*3s€.r.,i1ndn@'*E,r:r+-- Er I t HIGH COURT DATED:1 510912025 .-''t ,1 -r\',c. r ) AiE C I I i JUDGMENT+DECREE MACMA.No.296 ot 2020 / I \o z 0 tEB ZuE 1 ,/ PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA WIl'{OUT COSTS 13 ol b [ 3443 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONOA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOU S APPEAL NO: 296 OF 2020 Between: Shriram General lnsurance Company Ltd., Represented by its Manage(Legal), H.No.3-6-517, Sai Datta Arcade, 4th Floor, Flat no.40'1 , 402 and 403, Street no.6, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad-500 029 ...AppellanU2"d Respondent AND

1. Kumbar Sudhakar, S/o Kumbar Dathoba, Hindu, Aged 57 years, Occ. Business, R/o. 2-40, Shashtri Nagar Colony, lndravelly Village and Mandal, Adilabad District-504 346.

2. Kumbar Nirmala, W/o Kumbar Sudhakar, Aged. 50 years, Occ House wife, R/o, 2-40. Shashtri Nagar Colony, lndravelly Village and Mandal, Adilabad District-504 346. 3 Ved a m rvl a n i s a g a r, s/o B h eem ra o, H i n d u, As d.' ilTi 8io b1""1 8fr?Itl? t"ri: j Pulsar bearing N-o.AP 01 TNTR 5989, R/o. H.No.4-22, Gajanand Nagar, lndravelly'Adilabad District-S.4346 ...Respondents/l"tRespondent Appeal filed Under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act' against the Order and decree in M.V.O.P.No.208 0f 2014 daled.15l10l20',l9 0n the fite of the court of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional Diskict & Sessions Judge, Nizamabad. This appeals coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeals the judgment and decree of the Lower court and the material papers in the case and upon hearing the arguments of Sri M/s Harinath Reddy Soma, Advocate Appellan[ and Sri Gajanand Chakravarthy, Advocate, for the Respondent Nos.'l and 2, and none appeared for the respondent No.3. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

1. That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and hereby is partly allowed, by reducing the compensation amount from Rs.5,02,000/- to Rs.1,00,000/- (One Lakh Rupees only) with @ 7 .5% p a. inertest from the date of petition till the date of realization. +(

2. That the respondents are directing to deposit the amour:together with costs and interest after giving due credit to the amount alrerr l'/ deposited, if any, within a period of two months from the receipt of a copv : this judgment.

3. That the compensation amount shall be apportioned arr lng the claimants in the same manner and ratio as ordered by the learned Tril unal.

4. That on such deposit, the claimants are permitted tc eithdrawn the same without f urnishtng any surety.

5. That the claimants have already drawn the excess coml )nsatton amount, the respondents are not entitled to recover the same from ti r :laimants.

6. That save as aforesaid, the decree of the Lower Court ; rall stands confirmed in all other respects: and

7. That there be no order as to costs in this appeal //TRUE COPY// SD/. C.DEEPIKA ASS;I JTANT REGISTRAR l SEcTIoN oFFIcER To, 'l . The Motor Accident claims Tribunal-cum-Additiona l)istrict & sessions 2. Two CD Copies Judge, Nizamabad. o NVB HIGH COURT DATED:15t0912025 DECREE MACMA.No.296 ot 2020 PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA WI'I'{OUT COSTS