1

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDGE; IV ADDL.MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS

TRIBUNAL :NELLORE AT SRI POTTI SRIRAMULU NELLORE DISTRICT

Present: CH.RAMACHANDRA MURTHY,

Chairman, of IV Addl. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Nellore

Monday, this the 3rd day of April 2017

M.V.O.P.No.196 of 2013
Between:
1. Bheemavarapu Malakondaiah,
son of Subbarayudu, Hindu, aged about
46 years, resident of Ramanaidupalli village,
Marripadu Mandal, Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore
District
….. Claimant
And:-
1. K.Visalakshi
wife of Kanda Swamy, Hindu, owner of the
Lorry bearing Registration No.AP 26 U 8879
and residing at Rangannapaeta village,
Sullurpet Mandal, Sri P.S.R. Nellore District.
2. United India Insurance Company Limited,
represented by its Divisional Manager,
Brindavanam, Nellore, who is the insurer of the
Lorry bearing Registration No.AP 26 U 8879,
under Policy No.012082/31/11/00000800, valid
from 27.8.2011 to 26.8.2012. ….......... Respondents
M.V.O.P.No.197 of 2013
Between:
1. Cheemaladinne Venkata Rathnam
son of Venkataiah, Hindu, aged about 41 years,
resident of Ramanaidupalli village, Marripadu
Mandal, Sri P.S.R.Nellore District.

….. Claimant
And:-
1. K.Visalakshi
wife of Kanda Swamy, Hindu, owner of the
Lorry bearing Registration No.AP 26 U 8879
and residing at Rangannapaeta village,
Sullurpet Mandal, Sri P.S.R. Nellore District.
2. United India Insurance Company Limited,
represented by its Divisional Manager,
Brindavanam, Nellore, who is the insurer of the
Lorry bearing Registration No.AP 26 U 8879,
under Policy No.012082/31/11/00000800, valid
from 27.8.2011 to 26.8.2012. ….......... Respondents
 2

M.V.O.P.No.198 of 2013
Between:
1. Bheemavarapu Jayamma,
wife of Malakondaiah, Hindu, aged about 41
years, resident of Ramanaidupalli village, ,
Marripadu Mandal, Sri P.S.R.Nellore District.

….. Claimant
And:-
1. K.Visalakshi
wife of Kanda Swamy, Hindu, owner of the
Lorry bearing Registration No.AP 26 U 8879
and residing at Rangannapaeta village,
Sullurpet Mandal, Sri P.S.R. Nellore District.
2. United India Insurance Company Limited,
represented by its Divisional Manager,
Brindavanam, Nellore, who is the insurer of the
Lorry bearing Registration No.AP 26 U 8879,
under Policy No.012082/31/11/00000800, valid
from 27.8.2011 to 26.8.2012. ….......... Respondents

This petition is coming before me on 10.3.2017 for final hearing before me in

the presence of Sri G.Dayakar advocate for the petitioner, Smt. N.Kodanda Rami Reddy
advocate for second respondent and the first respondent has been called absent and
set exparte and upon perusing the material papers on record and upon hearing both
sides, this Court made the following:

ORDER

1. The claimant/Bheemavarapu Malakondaiah in M.V.O.P.No.196/2013, who was

aged 46 years at the time of accident, agriculturist and also doing milk business and

earning Rs.7,000/- per month, filed claim application under Section 166 of Motor

Vehicles Act, claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-.

2. The claimant/Cheemaladinne Venkata Rathnam in M.V.O.P.No.197/2013, who

was aged 41 years at the time of accident, running Laundry shop and earning

Rs.5,000/- per month, filed claim application under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act,

claiming compensation of Rs.1,30,000/-.

 3
3. The claimant/Bheemavarapu Jayamma in M.V.O.P.No.198/2013, who was aged

41 years at the time of accident, doing milk business and earning Rs.5,000/- per month,

filed claim application under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, claiming

compensation of Rs.50,000/-.

with the following averments:-

(I) On 15.6.2012, the claimants boarded Auto bearing No.AP 04 W 8561 at

Ramanaidupalli in order to go to Atmakur for their personal work . When the Auto

reached Narampet cross roads, the driver of the Auto stopped the Auto and demanded

the drunken passengers to get down from the Auto. Meanwhile, the driver of the Lorry

bearing No.AP 26 U 8879 drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner with high

speed, resulting he was unable to control the vehicle and dashed the stationed Auto,

resulting the inmates of Auto and claimants received injuries. Two persons died in the

accident. The injured were shifted to Government Hospital for treatment. The

claimants further shifted to Bollineni Hospital, Nellore for better treatment. They

spent medical expenses.

(ii) A case was registered in crime No.75/2012 of Atmakur Police Station .

Therefore, The respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation

claimed by the claimant. Hence, the claim.

4. The first respondent who is registered owner of the Lorry bearing No.AP 26 U

8879, remained exparte.

5. Second respondent/insurance company resisted the claim by filing counters in

O.P.No.196 to 198/2013 contending that the driver of the Lorry was not negligent and

that the driver of the Auto was negligent and that the driver of the Lorry and Auto did
 4
not possess valid driving licence. The claim is excessive. Therefore, they requests to

dismiss the claim application.

6. Basing on the above pleadings, the following issues have been framed in

O.P.No.196 to 198 of 2013:-

1. :- Whether the accident occurred due to the rash

and negligent driving of the driver of the Lorry
bearing No.AP 26 U 8879
2. :- Whether the claimant is entitled for
compensation if so to what extent and amount?
3. :- To what relief?

7. On joint memo the claim applications in M.V.O.P.No.197 of 2013

and M.V.O.P.NO.198/2013 are clubbed with M.V.O.P.No.196/2013.

Evidence is recorded in M.V.O.P.No.196/2013 and treated as evidence

in M.V.O.P.No.197 of 2013 and M.V.O.P.NO.198/2013.

8. On behalf of the claimants, PW-1 to PW-4 were examined and Exs.A-1 to A-14
documents were marked and Ex.C-1was marked.

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF CLAIMANT

PW-1 :- Bheemavarapu Malakondaiah, who is claimant in
M.V.O.P.No.196/2013
Pw-2 :- Cheemaladinne Venkata Rathnam, who is claimant in
M.V.O.P.No.197/2013
PW-3 :- Jayamma, who is claimant in M.V.O.P.No.198/2013
PW-4 :- Dr.Y.Siva Prasad, who examined PW-2
DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF CLAIMANT
Ex.A-1 :- Attested copy of First information report in crime
No.75/2012 of Atmakur Police Station
Ex.A-2 :- Attested Xerox copy of wound certificate of PW-
1/B.Malakondaiah
Ex.A-3 :- Attested Xerox coy of charge sheet filed before Judicial
Magistrate of First Class, Atmakur
Ex.A-4 :- Bunch of medical bills for amount of Rs.4,926/-
Ex.A-5 :- Bunch of scan and laboratory reports of PW-1
 5
Ex.A-6 :- Bunch of X-ray films
Ex.A-7 :- Attested Xerox copy of wound certificate of PW-2
Ex.A-8 :- Bunch of Medical bills for Rs.20,325.96 ps
Ex.A-9 :- Bunch of discharge requests advise and department of
clinical pathelogist micro biology and bio chemistry
Ex.A-10 :- Bunch of X-ray films
Ex.A-11 :- Attested Xerox copy of wound certificate of PW-3
Ex.A-12 :- Bunch of medical bills for Rs.2,288/-
Ex.A-13 :- Bunch of scan and laboratory reports of PW-3
Ex.A-14 :- Bunch of X-ray films
Ex.C-1 :- Case sheet maintained by Narayana Medical College
Hospital, Nellore

9. On behalf of second respondent, the Administrative Officer, S.Chenna

Srikalyan examined as RW-1 and got marked Ex.B-1 insurance policy bearing

No.012082/31/11/00000800 valid from 27.8.2011 to midnight 26.8.2012.

10. Heard both sides and perused relevant records, Written arguments filed on

behalf of the claimants.

Issue No.1 in M.V.O.P.No.196/2013, 197/2013 and 198/2013:-

1 :- Whether the accident occurred due to the rash

and negligent driving of the driver of the Lorry
bearing No.AP 26 U 8879?

11. It is not in dispute that first respondent is the owner of the offending Lorry

bearing No.AP 26 U 8879. It is evident from Ex.B-1 insurance policy, Ex.A-1 first

information report and Ex.A-3 charge sheet . It is not in dispute that claimants met

with accident and received injuries on 15.6.2012 near Nandavarapu village. It is

evident from Ex.A-1 first information report and Ex.A-3 charge sheet. As per charge

sheet one A.Karthikeyan, son of Adikesavan drove the offending Lorry as on the
 6
material date of accident. PW-1 PW-3 are cited as witnesses as LWs-2 to LW-4 as per

Ex.A-3 charge sheet.

12. Learned advocate for the claimants argued that the accident took place due to

the rash and negligent driving of the driver of Lorry bearing No.AP 26 U 8879. On the

other hand, the learned advocate for the second respondent argued that the accident

had occurred due to negligence of the driver of the Auto bearing No.AP 04 W 8561.

First respondent, who is the owner of the offending Lorry did not contest the

proceedings and she was set exparte. Admittedly, the respondents are not eye

witnesses to the accident. Insurance company did not adduce any evidence of its own

regarding the manner of accident. To speak about the accident, the second respondent

did not choose to examine any witness except filing petition under Section 170 of

Motor Vehicles Act. Rw-1 is Administrative Officer, he is not an eyewitness to the

accident. His evidence is no way helpful to the second respondent to prove the manner

of accident.

13. On the other hand, PW-1 to PW-3, who are claimants and injured categorically

deposed in their evidence that the driver of the Lorry was negligent at the time of

accident. They denied a suggestion that the driver of the Auto was negligent at the

time of accident as driver of Auto suddenly stopped the Auto and that insurer and

insured are proper and necessary parties to the petition. Nothing has been elicited

from their cross-examination against the driver of the Auto. As stated above, RW-1 is

not an eyewitness to the accident. RW-1 denied a suggestion that Auto driver was not

negligent at the time of accident and that the Lorry driver was negligent.

14. On the other hand, as per Ex.A-3 charge sheet , it is clear that the investigation

officer, after completion of investigation filed charge sheet alleging that the driver of
 7
the Lorry drove his Lorry in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the stationed

Auto. From the evidence of PW-1 to PW-3 coupled with the contents of Exs.A-1 first

information report and Ex.A-3 charge sheet, it is clear that the driver of the Lorry

drove the Lorry in a rash and negligent manner and caused the accident. In the

absence of any contrary evidence on behalf of second respondent, it can safely be held

that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Lorry

and claimants sustained injuries while the Motor vehicle was in use. Though, second

respondent pleaded that the driver of the Auto and Lorry did not possess valid driving

licence, they did not choose to produce any evidence to that effect. Therefore, the

contention of the second respondent that the driver of the Auto and Lorry did not

possess valid driving licence as on the material date of accident, cannot be accepted.

15. As per Ex.B-1 insurance policy, the offending vehicle was insured at the

relevant point of time, valid from 27.8.2011 to midnight 26.8.2012 . The accident

took place on 15.6.2012, the policy was in force as on the material date of

accident. Hence, I answered the issue against the respondents and in favour of

the claimant.

16. Issue No.2 in O.P.No.196/2013:-

1. :- Whether the claimant is entitled for

compensation if so to what extent and amount?

As per Ex.A-2 wound certificate, PW-1/B.Malakondaiah sustained the

following injuries:-

1. :- A lacerated wound over occipital region 6 X 2 C.M.

The above injury is simple in nature.

17. In order to prove the injury, PW-1 did not choose to examine the medical

officer. Taking into consideration of evidence of PW-1 coupled with the injuries

referred under Ex.A-2, I hereby award Rs.5,000/- towards pain and suffering .
 8
18. As per evidence of PW-1, he is an agriculturist and doing milk business and

earning Rs.7,000/- per month. He did not produce any evidence regarding monthly

income. In the absence of any such evidence, I hereby fix monthly income of

Rs.4,000/-. Taking into consideration of injuries received by PW-1, I hereby award

Rs.4,000 /- (Rs.4,000 X1) towards loss of earnings.

19. PW-1 got marked Ex.A-5/Bunch of scan and laboratory reports issued by

Narayana General hospital. As per those reports, there is no brain injury. PW-1

also produced Ex.A-6 Bunch of X-ray films. Ex.A-4 is bunch of medical bills issued

by Narayana Medical Hospital to prove that PW-1 incurred medical expenses of

Rs.4,926/-. Taking into consideration of bills in Ex.A-4, I hereby award

Rs.4,926/- towards medical expenses.

20. There is no medical evidence to prove that PW-1 sustained any disability

and loss of earnings. In the absence of any such evidence, PW-1 is not entitled to

compensation under the head of permanent disability and loss of earnings. Rest

of the claim is hereby rejected.

The compensation awarded to the petitioner is as follows:-

S.No. Nature of Amount awarded

compensation
1. Pain and suffering Rs.5,000-00
2. Loss of earnings 4,000-00
3. Medical Expenses 4,926-00
Total Rs. 13,926-00
(Rupees thirteen thousands nine hundred twenty six only)

Accordingly, this issue is answered.

Issue No.2 in O.P.No.197/2013:-

1. :- Whether the claimant is entitled for

compensation if so to what extent and amount?

21. As per Ex.A-7 wound certificate, PW-2/Cheemaladinne Venkata Rathnam

sustained the following injuries:-

1. :- Complaining of pain in left hip and headache

 9
The above injury is simple in nature.

22. In order to prove the injury referred above, PW-2 examined PW-4/Dr.Y.Siva

Prasad, Professor Orthopaedics, Narayana Medical College,Nellore, who deposed

that there was fracture of colles left radius and acetabulam fracture. The patient

was operated by pin traction for acetabulam fracture. Colles fracture treated by

close manipulated reduction (CMR) and POP. Patient was discharged on

27.12.2012. Through his evidence Ex.C-1 case sheet was marked. He admitted that

the fracture was united by the date of discharge of hospital. The condtion of the

patient was good from the date of discharge from hospital. Nothing has been

elicited from his cross-examination to disprove his evidence. Taking into

consideration of evidence of PW-2 and PW-4, I hereby award Rs.25,000/- towards

pain and suffering . Rs.1,000/- is awarded towards transport charges.

23. As per evidence of PW-2, he is running Laundry and earning Rs.5,000/- per

month. He did not produce any evidence regarding monthly income. In the

absence of any such evidence, I hereby fix monthly income of Rs.4,000/-. Taking

into consideration of injuries received by PW-2, I hereby award Rs.12,000 /-

(Rs.4,000 X 3).

24. PW-2 got marked Ex.A-9/Bunch of discharge reports issued by Bollineni

Super Specialty Hospital, Nellore. PW-2 also produced Ex.A-10 Bunch of X-ray

films. Ex.A-8 is bunch of medical bills issued by Narayana Medical Hospital to

prove that PW-2 incurred medical expenses of Rs.20,325.96ps. Nothing has been

elicited from the cross-examination of PW-2 to disprove the bills in Ex.A-8. Taking

into consideration of bills in Ex.A-8, I hereby award Rs.20,325 /- (rounded off)

towards medical expenses.

25. There is no medical evidence to prove that PW-2 sustained any disability

and loss of earnings. In the absence of any such evidence, PW-2 is not entitled to

compensation under the head of permanent disability and loss of earnings. Rest

of the claim is hereby rejected.

 10
The compensation awarded to the petitioner is as follows:-

S.No. Nature of Amount awarded

compensation
1. Pain and suffering Rs.25,000-00
2. Transport charges 1,000-00
3. Loss of earnings Rs.12,000-00
4. Medical Expenses 20,325-00
Total Rs. 58,325-00
(Rupees fifty eight thousands three hundred twenty five
only)

Accordingly, this issue is answered.

Issue No.2 in O.P.No.198/2013:-

1. :- Whether the claimant is entitled for

compensation if so to what extent and amount?

26. As per Ex.A-11 wound certificate, PW-3/Bheemavarapu Jayamma sustained

the following injuries:-

1. :- Lacerated wound over forehead 8 X 3 X 2 C.M.,

2. :- Lacerated injury over back of chest 3 X 2 X 1 C.M.,

The above injuries are simple in nature.

27. In order to prove the injury referred above, PW-3 did not choose to medical

officer to prove the above injuries. Taking into consideration of evidence of PW-

3 coupled with Ex.A-11 wound certificate, I hereby award Rs.5,000/- towards

pain and suffering .

28. As per evidence of PW-3, she is doing milk business and also agriculturist

and earning Rs.5,000/- per month. He did not produce any evidence regarding

monthly income. In the absence of any such evidence, I hereby fix monthly income

of Rs.4,000/-. Taking into consideration of injuries received by PW-3, I hereby

award Rs.4,000 /- (Rs.4,000 X1).

29. PW-3 got marked Ex.A-13/Bunch of scan and laboratory reports. PW-3 also

produced Ex.A-14 Bunch of X-ray films. Ex.A-12 is bunch of medical bills issued by

Narayana General Hospital for Rs.2,288/-. Nothing has been elicited from the

cross-examination of PW-3 to disprove the bills in Ex.A-12. Taking into

 11
consideration of bills in Ex.A-12, I hereby award Rs.2,288/- towards medical

expenses.

30. There is no medical evidence to prove that PW-3 sustained any disability

and loss of earnings. In the absence of any such evidence, PW-3 is not entitled to

compensation under the head of permanent disability and loss of earnings. Rest

of the claim is hereby rejected.

The compensation awarded to the petitioner is as follows:-

S.No. Nature of Amount awarded

compensation
1. Pain and suffering Rs.5,000-00
2. Loss of earnings Rs.4,000-00
3. Medical Expenses 2,288-00
Total Rs. 11,288-00
(Rupees eleven thousands two hundred eighty eight only)

Accordingly, this issue is answered.

31. Issue No.3:-

M.V.O.P.No.196/2013

To what relief?

As per the findings on Issues Nos.1 and 2, I here by award Rs.13,926/- to

the claimant against the respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally.

32. M.V.O.P.No.197/2013

To what relief?

As per the findings on Issues Nos.1 and 2, I here by award Rs.58,325/- to

the claimant against the respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally.

33. M.V.O.P.No.198/2013

To what relief?

As per the findings on Issues Nos.1 and 2, I here by award Rs.11,288/- to

the claimant against the respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally.

 12
Result in M.V.O.P.No.196/2013

34. In the result, the claim of the claimant is hereby partly allowed with

proportionate costs, awarding compensation of Rs.13,926/- (Rupees thirteen

thousands nine hundred twenty six only) to the claimant against the

respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally and with subsequent interest at the rate

of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. The award

amount shall deposit within one month. On deposit the petitioner is hereby

ordered to withdraw entire amount. Advocate fee is fixed at Rs.1,500/-. The rest

of the claim is hereby dismissed without costs.

Result in M.V.O.P.No.197/2013

35. In the result, the claim of the claimant is hereby partly allowed with

proportionate costs, awarding compensation of Rs.58,325/- (Rupees fifty eight

thousands three hundred twenty five only) to the claimant against the

respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally and with subsequent interest at the rate

of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. The award

amount shall deposit within one month. On deposit the petitioner is hereby

ordered to withdraw entire amount. Advocate fee is fixed at Rs.1,500/-. The rest

of the claim is hereby dismissed without costs.

Result in M.V.O.P.No.198/2013

36. In the result, the claim of the claimant is hereby partly allowed with
proportionate costs, awarding compensation of Rs.11,288/- (Rupees eleven
thousands two hundred eighty eight only) to the claimant against the
respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally and with subsequent interest at the rate
of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. The award
amount shall deposit within one month. On deposit the petitioner is hereby
ordered to withdraw entire amount. Advocate fee is fixed at Rs.1,500/-. The rest
of the claim is hereby dismissed without costs.
Typed on my direct dictation by the steno-typist corrected and
pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 3rd day of April 2017.

Chairman,
IV ADDL.MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMANTS TRIBUNAL,
NELLORE.
 13
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF CLAIMANT

PW-1 :- Bheemavarapu Malakondaiah, who is claimant in
M.V.O.P.No.196/2013
Pw-2 :- Cheemaladinne Venkata Rathnam, who is claimant in
M.V.O.P.No.197/2013
PW-3 :- Jayamma, who is claimant in M.V.O.P.No.198/2013
PW-4 :- Dr.Y.Siva Prasad, who examined PW-2
DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF CLAIMANT
Ex.A-1 :- Attested copy of First information report in crime No.75/2012 of
Atmakur Police Station
Ex.A-2 :- Attested Xerox copy of wound certificate of PW-1/B.Malakondaiah
Ex.A-3 :- Attested Xerox coy of charge sheet filed before Judicial Magistrate
of First Class, Atmakur
Ex.A-4 :- Bunch of medical bills for amount of Rs.4,926/-
Ex.A-5 :- Bunch of scan and laboratory reports of PW-1
Ex.A-6 :- Bunch of X-ray films
Ex.A-7 :- Attested Xerox copy of wound certificate of PW-2
Ex.A-8 :- Bunch of Medical bills for Rs.20,325.96 ps
Ex.A-9 :- Bunch of discharge requests advise and department of clinical
pathelogist micro biology and bio chemistry
Ex.A-10 :- Bunch of X-ray films
Ex.A-11 :- Attested Xerox copy of wound certificate of PW-3
Ex.A-12 :- Bunch of medical bills for Rs.2,288/-
Ex.A-13 :- Bunch of scan and laboratory reports of PW-3
Ex.A-14 :- Bunch of X-ray films
Ex.C-1 :- Case sheet maintained by Narayana Medical College Hospital,
Nellore

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF SECOND RESPONDENT

NIL
DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF SECOND RESPONDENT
Ex.B-1 :- Insurance policy bearing No.012082/31/11/00000800
valid from 27.8.2011 to midnight 26.8.2012

CHAIRMAN
IV ADDL.MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMANTS TRIBUNAL,
NELLORE.
14