The High Court · 2025

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO M.A.C.M.A. No.11O7 of 2O14 JUDGMENT: Aggrieved by the award and decree dated 18.02'2013 passed by the learned Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional District Judge (FTC), Warangal (for short 'the Tribunal') in M.V.O.P. No.679 of 2011, the present appeal is filed by the claimant.

2. No representation on behalf of respondent No'2-The Shriram General Insurance Company Limited in this appeal'

3. Heard Sri Srcenivasa Rao Ravulapati, learned counsel for the appellant

4. Brief facts of case:

4.1 On O5.OB.2O1O lr'hile the appellant was proceeding with some others in an auto rickshaw bearing No. AP 36 U 9275 near Narsakkapallv village on Huzurabad main road, at about B-30 p.m., one tractor Do-jar bearing No. AP.23'G.7216 being driven by its driver came in a rash and negligent manner at high speed from the opposite direction and dashed the auto. 2 Due to which, two passengers of the auto died on the spot and the appellant and others have sustained grievous injuries. Immediately aJter the accident, the injured were shifted to the hospital for treatment.

4.2 On compiaint, the Police, Parkal registered a case in Crime No.173l2OlO for the offence under Sections 304-A and 337 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. At the time of accident, the appellant was aged about 32 years and working as coolie and she used to earn Rs.8,000/- per month. Thus, the appellant has filed M.V.O.P.No.679 of 2Ol1 claiming an amount of Rs.60,OOO/ and the Tribunal has allowed the M.V.O.P.No.679 of 2Ol I in part and awarded an amount ol Rs.9,OOO/ to be pa-yable by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 jointly and severallv Her-rce this appeal. Submissions of the learned counsel for the aooellant:

5. 1 Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that due to the rash and negligent driving of tractor, the appellant has sustained grievous injuries on 09.08.20 10 and she has filed M.V.O.P. No.679 of 2Ol1 claiming an amount of Rs.6O,OOO/- tou'ards compensation under various heads. To prove her J claim, the appellant has filed Exs.Al to A3 documents and examined herself as PW. 1. However, the Tribunal without properly consiciering the same passed the impugned award fixing contribu tory negligence against the tractor Do-jar bearing No. AP.23.G.7216 as well as auto bearing No.AP.36.U.9275, though the accident was occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the tractor only.

5.2 He further submitted that in Ex.A3 charge sheet the Investigating Officer specifically stated that the accident was occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of tractor only. However, the Tribunal without taking into consideration of same, passed the impugned award fixing contributory negligence against both vehicles and a,il/arded meager amount

5.3 He further submitted thar the Tribunal passed the impugned au,ard holding that since more than the permitted passengers were travelling in the auto, Iixed the contributory negligence on the said ground is not contrary to law. In support of his contention, he relied upon a decision of the erstwhile High Court Andhra pradesh in M.Madhavi and 4 others vs. Ch.Ananthaiah and others (M.A.C.M.A.No.229 of 2OO9).

6. Sri K.Ajay Kumar, learned counsel appeared on behalf of very same Insurance Company in M.A.C.M.A.No.2456 of 2014 submitted that, according to the evidence of PW.i, twelve passengers were travelling in the auto at the time of accident. Hence, the Tribunal has rightly passed the impugned award fixing contributory negligence against both the vehicles and basing on the same, awarded compensation. Therefore, the appellant is not entitled for enhancement of compensation.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant by way of reply submitted that the appellant is not seeking any enhancement of compensation in this appeal and she restricted the claim ol only ln fixing contributory negligence on the part of t',r'o vehicle s Analysis:

8. This Court considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and perused the records. It is an undisputed fact that the appellant has sustained inj uries in ) the accident which was occurred on 09.O8.2010. Ex.Al F.l.R. No.173 of 20 lCt n,as registered on 06.08.20 10 for the offence under Sections 3O4-A and 337 of Indian Penal Code, 186O and the Investigation Officer after conducting detailed investigation filed Ex.A3 charge sheet on 19.10.2010 wherein it was specifica.lly mentioned that the accident was occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of tractor Do-jar bearing No. AP.23.G.7216, due to which, the appellant has sustained injuries and others have sustained grievous injuries and two persons were died on the spot. The Tribunal without taking into consideration of Exs.Al and A'3, fixed the contributory nergligence on both the tractor and amto in the absence of any contra evidence adduced by the respondents, only on the ground that in the auto tu,elve passengers were travelling at the time of accidcnt

9. In Devisingh v. Vikramsinghl, Full Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Oourt relying upon the principle laid down by the Honlcle Supreme Court in Sudhir Kumar Rana v Surinder Singhz held that at the time of accident the rider of ' zoo8 ec; :qj ' 2oo8 ec; t8i+ 6 the motorcycle was driving the vehicle with two pillion riders instead of one pillion rider. The Tribunal apportioned the liability between jeep driver and driver of motorcycle on the ground that the vehicle is overioading and thus Ilxed the liability against both the vehicles, is not permissibie under law.

10. In Manjo Bee vs. Sajiad Khan3, the Division Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court also held that mere overloading do not amount to contributory negligence. i 1. In the above said judgments, the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well High Court of Madhya Pradesh specifically held that basing on the overloading in the particular vehicle, the negligence or apportionment of the compensation and the liability will not fixed between two vehicles, especially the accident was occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the other vehicle.

12. In ihe case on hand, Exs.Al F.I.R. and Exs.A3 charge sheet clearly proves that the accident was occurred on

05.O8.2O10 due to rash and negligent driving of the tractor. ' 2oot act ult i I l 7 In view of the principle laid down in Devisingh (supra), Sudhir Kumar Rana (supra) and Manjo Bee (supra), this Court is ol ther considered view that apportioning the liability between tractor as well as auto is not sustainable under law.

13. Hence, the impugned judgment and decree passed by the Tribunal dated 18.02.20 13 to the extent of hxing the liability against the auto is liabte to be set aside and fixed the liability and negligence on the part of tractor Do-jar bearing No. AP 23 G 7216.

14. In tl.e result, the M.A.C.M.A. is allowed in part artd respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are hereby directed to pay Rs.18,OOO/- to the appellants along with interest at 7 .SVo p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization and respondent Nos. i and 2 are directed to deposit the compensation arrrount with accrued interest within a period of two monttrs from the date of receipt of a copy of this.itrdgment after deducting the amount if any a-lready deposited. On such deposit, the appellant is entitled to r.r,ithdraw the said amount without furnishing any security. No costs 8 Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPYII Sd/. P.C.H. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To 1' The chairman motor Accidents.craims Tribunar cum rv Additionar District . ;, ;r}tdll*iiilf#fr.3'ffi *t*q*!l?;ff $:H;,: i" sEc OFFICER (p HIGH COURT DATED: 0210',12025 JUDGMENT MACMA.N o.1107 ot 2014 i.{e Si4r o^ 1 (\o/< ! C) ,i 16 APn zffi J .l_ \l+, - i,!s5ilC + *t:.O PARTLY ALLOWING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS bc"1*1 [ 3303 ] € IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1107 OF 2014 Between: Bochu Manemma, Wo. Ravinder, aged about 32 years, Occ: Coolie R/o. Madathapalli ( Kakarlapalli) Village Regonda Mandal, Warangal District ...APPELLANT(S) AND

1. T. Devika, Wo. Ravindar Reddy, aged about 34 years, Occ: Agriculture and the owner of the Crime Vehicle R/o. H.No. 4-141 Sericapalli (V) Huzarabad Mandal, Karimnagar District

2. The Sriram General lnsurance Co. Ltd., Rep. by its Branch Manager Pochamma Maidan Warangal ..,RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Appeal filed under Sectiom 173 of Motor Vehicles against the judgment and decree dated 18.02.2013, made in MVOP No.679 of 2011, on the file of the Chairman motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum lV Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), at Warangal. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Court below and the material papers in the MVOP and upon hearing the arguments of SRl. SREENIVASA RAO RAVULAPAf|, Advocate for the appeallant and of SRl. N MOHAN KRISHNA (NA), Advocate for the Respondent No.2. This Court doth Order and Decree as followsl 1, That the MACMA be and hereby is allowed in part; 2. That the respondent Nos.1 and 2 be and hereby are directed to pay Rs.18,000/- (Rupees Eighteen thousaM and only) to the appellants along with interest a|7.5% pa. from the date of Petition till the date of realization; 3. That the respondent Nos.1 and 2 be and hereby are directed to deposit the compensation amount with accrued interest within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment after deducting the amount if any already deposited;

4. That on such deposit, the appellant be and hereby is entitled to withdraw the said amount without furnishing any security;

5. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. //TRUE COPY// Sd/- P.CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR tt- OFFICER SECTI To

1. The Chairman motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum lV Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), at Warangal.

2. Two CD Copies (s- HIGH COURT DATED: 0210112025 DECREE MACMA.N o.1107 ot 20'14 PARTLY ALL.OWING THE MACMA WITII.IOUT COSTS f,+ \t- L>r kc4*>