Smt B.Sunitha, III ADJ

1

IN THE COURT OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL:

PRESENT: Smt. B. SUNITA,

III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, FAST TRACK COURT, ANANTHAPURAMU.

Friday, the 21 st day of April, 2017.

ORIGINAL PETITION NO.491/2015.

Between:-

Erikala Ramudu @ Sake Ramanna ...Petitioner

A n d

1. Boya Setteppa

2. National Insurance Co. Ltd., Rept. By its D.M. Ananthapuramu

3. Sanna Marenna …Respondents

This petition coming on 21.04.2017 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri. P. Ravindranatha Reddy, advocate for the Petitioner and respondent No.1 and 3 are set exparte and Sri. M. Venu Gopal, advocate for respondent No.2, the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this tribunal delivered the following:

O R D E R

1. Petition is filed Under Section 140 & 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Rule 455 of AP Motor Vehicles Rules 1989, claiming compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by petitioner Erikala

Ramudu @ Sake Ramanna in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 22.01.2013 at about 3-00 am., near Belodu Village, due to rash and negligent driving of driver of crime TATA ACE Vehicle bearing

No.AP-02-TB-0554.

2 2. Case of petitioner is that on 22.01.2013 at about 3-30 am., while the petitioner was going along with others and boarded in goods TATA ACE

Vehicle bearing No.AP-02-TB-0554 to sell their cotton bales at Bellary agricultural market and reached in between the villages of Rangachedu and

Belodu at about 4-00 am., its driver drove in a rash and negligent manner and got the vehicle turned turtle. Due to said accident, petitioner received multiple injuries and immediately he was shifted to Government Hospital,

Rayadurg and later to Government General Hospital, Ananthapuramu for treatment.

3. Petitioner was hale and healthy, aged about 38 years and eking out his lively hood by attending to agricultural work. He was owning agricultural land and earning Rs.2,00,000/- per annum. He was also doing sheep business and was earning Rs.5,000/- every month. His family members were depending on his income. Inspite of taking treatment at Pawani

Hospital and S.V. Hospital, Ananthapuramu by spending amount of

Rs.35,000/-, still he is suffering.

4. As the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of TATA ACE Vehicle bearing No.AP-02-TB-0554 Gummagatta police registered a case against its driver in Cr.No.7/2013 U/S. 338 and 304-(A) IPC.

5. First and third respondents remained ex-party 3

6. Second respondent filed a counter denying allegations made in petition regarding manner of accident, age, income, occupation injuries received by petitioner, amount spent for treatment. Mandatory provisions of Sec.158(6) of M.V.Act are violated by police. The claim of compensation is excessive.

Driver of charge sheeted vehicle has no driving license at the time of accident. Finally, prayed for dismissal of the petition against this respondent.

7. Basing on the averments, following issues were settled for trail;

1. Whether the petitioner Erikala Ramudu @ Sake Ramanna, received injuries in motor vehicle accident on 22.01.2013 at about 03-00 am., near Belodu Village, due to rash and negligent driving of driver of TATA

ACE Vehicle bearing No.AP-02-TB-0554?

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to receive compensation, if so to what extent and from whom?

3. To what relief ?

8. To prove their respective contentions, on behalf of petitioner, Pw1 and

Pw2 are examined Ex.A1 to Ex.A11 are marked. On behalf of second respondent Rw1 and Rw2 are examined and Ex.X1, Ex.B1 and Ex.B2 are marked.

Issue No.I:- 9. According to Pw1, on 22.01.2013 while petitioner was going along with others to sell their agricultural produce i.e., cotton bales and boarded in goods vehicle TATA ACE Vehicle bearing No.AP-02-TB-0554 to sell the cotton 4 bales at Bellary agricultural market and reached in between the villages of

Rangachedu and Belodu at about 4-00 am., its driver drove in a rash and negligent manner and got the vehicle turned and turtle. Due to said accident petitioner received multiple injuries and immediately he was shifted to

Government Hospital, Rayadurg and later to Government General Hospital,

Ananthapuramu for treatment.

10. During cross examination of Petitioner, it is elicited that he was traveling in TATA ACE Vehicle bearing No.AP-02-TB-0554 i.e., goods carriage when accident occurred and there were two passengers in addition to driver in the vehicle. He was carrying 10 tons of cotton bales along with him. He denied that more than eight passengers traveled in crime vehicle. To prove the accident petitioner has marked Ex.A1 certified copy of First Information

Report and Ex.A3 certified copy of charge sheet. Both these documents reveal manner of accident as stated by petitioner and corroborated with the oral evidence of petitioner. Hence this issue is answered in favour of the petitioner.

Issue No. II

11. To prove his injuries, petitioner has marked Ex.A2 certified copy of wound certificate and according to it petitioner received three injuries and out of them two injuries are grevious in nature. Petitioner examined the doctor who treated him at S.V.Hospital, Ananthapuramu as Pw2.

According to Pw2 on 22.01.2013 he treated petitioner who came to

S.V.Hospital, Ananthapuramu with a history of Trauma with complainant of 5 pain over lumbar spine, pain over Lower Abdomen and difficulty in lower limbs in moving lower limbs and urethral bleeding present. He referred the patient to Satyam Diagnostic Centre for further evaluation and they conducted MRI lumbar spine and ultra sound examination and found lumbar spondylosis, L3-L4 posterior disk bulge with annular tear and bilateral neural foramina compromise. Lw-L5 posterior disk bulge with annular tear and bilateral neural foramina compromise. L5-S1 mild posterior disk bulge,

Ultrasonography found. Irregular echogenic area at base of bladded- hematoma – Post operative left nefroctomy status and X-ray pelvis bone was taken in S.V.Hospital, Ananthapuramu and finding superior end inferior public rami fracture. Public rami (bone) ring type bone is an important bone in human skeleton. Entire weight of the body is resting on pubic rami bone. If anybody received injury of pubic rami bone, it is very difficult to sit in cross legging position or unable to squat on the ground. Petitioner received urethral injury and due to pubic-rami fracture, it leads to difficulty in passing urine. It causes mild hydro rethro nephrosis because of the cumulative effect of the above injuries.

12. Petitioner should go for mandatory tratement and checkups through out his life. Ex.C1 is case sheet of petitioner, Ex.A5 contains 18-bills prescribed to the patient for an amount of Rs.19,999/- relating to his treatment.

Prescriptions were also issued under his guidance. During his cross examination, it is elicited that he has given primary treatment and referred to higher center for better treatment because of gravity of injuries. For a injury on Pubic-rami, it is necessary for taking longer period of treatment.

Treatment given at Government Hospital ist free of cost.

6 13. Therefore as seen from available documents and also the evidence of

Pw2, it is clear that the petitioner received grevious injuries to his pubic rami and he as to take treatment throught his life. Ex.A2 is the wound certificate given by S.V.Hospital, Ex.A8 report is given by Satyam Diagnostic Center,

Ex.A9 is discharge summary and Ex.A10 is discharge card issued by

Government Hospital, Kurnool and they relate to the treatment taken by the petitioner.

14. Therefore, a perusal of available evidence reveal that petitioner is still a patient. Hence, a sum of Rs.40,000/- is awarded towards compensation for two grevious injuries, another sum of Rs.30,000/- is awarded towards medical expenses, in addition a sum of Rs.30,000/- is awarded towards pain and suffering and another sum of Rs.25,000/- is awarded towards transport and attendant expenses and a sum of Rs.2,000/- is awarded towards simple injury and another sum of Rs.1,00,000/- is awarded towards future medical expenses as throughout his life, the petitioner has to take treatment and it is also mandatory and since petitioner is aged about 38 years. Therefore, in total a sum of Rs.2,27,000/- is awarded towards compensation.

15. The Contention of second respondent is that, the driver of charge sheeted vehicle has no driving license and to prove his contention, he marked

Ex.X1 authorization letter. Though, Rw1 is examined, nothing to disbelieve his version that there was no driving license to charge sheet driver is elicited.

Rw2 is the insurance official and his contention is that there was no driving license to charge sheeted driver and if there is no driving license to charge 7 sheet driver, charge sheet will be filed under M.V.Act also. But in this case the charge sheet does not reveal provisions of M.V.Act. However, insurance policy was in force on the date of accident. He denied that petitioner is a third party to crime vehicle.

16. Learned advocate for petitioner relied on judgments between National

Insurance Co.Ltd., Vs. L.Paulraj and others, reported in 2016 ACJ 2635 2)

Raghavendra V. Kengaiah and others, reported in 2016 ACJ 1094, 3) Yogesha

Vs. P.Vikaram and another, reported in 2016 ACJ 2521 4) Bajaj Allianz

General Insurance Co.Ltd., Vs. M.Sreedevi and others, reported in 2016ACJ 445, 5) Mani and others Vs. Joby John and another, reported in 2017 ACJ 392

6) Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. M.Sreedevi and another, reported in 2016 ACJ 445 7) HDFC ERGO General Ins. Co. Ltd., Vs. Rangarao

Naval Patil and others, reported in 2017 ACJ 366 and argued that the negligence should be taken while awarding compensation and since petitioner is third party to insurance policy, insurance company should be directed to pay the amount first and later it is at liberty to recover from owner or driver.

Per contra learned advocate for second respondent relied on judgments between United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Rakesh Kumar Arora and

Others, reported in (2008) 0 Supreme (SC) 1426 2) National Insurance Co.

Ltd., Vs. Cholleti Bharatamma & Ors., reported in (2007) 0 Supreme (SC) 1356 of our Hon'ble Apex Court and argued that as held in judgments, if there is no driving license to charge sheeted driver, insurance company cannot be held liable for payment of compensation and as the petitioner has traveled as an un-authorized passenger in goods carriage, though Rs.75/- 8 was collected under the head of NFPP, insurance company cannot be held liable for payment of compensation. Hence, in this case also, as there was no driving license to charge sheeted driver, insurance company is exempted from liability.

17. Therefore, as seen from the evidence adduced on behalf of second respondent, it is clear that insurance policy was in force on the date of accident, but there was no driving license to charge sheeted driver. Hence, though a sum of Rs.75/- was collected under the head of NFPP by the insurance company, as the petitioner is not a third party, insurance company cannot be held liable for payment of compensation. Therefore claim against

R2 is dismissed. Only R1 and R3 are jointly and severally held liable for payment of compensation.

18. As per directions of our Hon'ble High Court in judgment between The

New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Rep by its Branch Manager, Branch Office at

Pragathinagar, Station Road, Peddapally, Karimnagar District and another Vs.

Margam Padmavathi, W/o.Late Kumara Swamy and five others in

M.A.C.M.A.No.188/2007 dated:16-12-2014 send the copy of order to

Regional Transport Authority, Anantapuramu concerned for necessary action.

Issue No.III 19. In the result, petition is partly allowed with proportionate costs. A sum of Rs.2,27,000/- (Rupees two lakhs twenty seven thousands only)is awarded 9 towards compensation with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. Claim against second respondent is dismissed. Only first and third respondents are jointly and severally held liable for payment of compensation. If they fail to deposit the amount within two months from the date of this order, they are directed to pay interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. On deposit of the amount petitioner is permitted to withdraw 50% at once and remaining 50% shall be kept in fixed deposit in any nationalized bank for a period of one year. The amount if any awarded U/S. 140 of M.V. Act shall be deducted from this amount. Advocate fee is fixed at Rs.2,000/-.

Dictated to Stenographer transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by

me in the open court, on this the 21st day of April, 2017.

III Addl. District Judge, Fast Track Court ,

Ananthapuramu.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

Petitioner Respondents

PW.1 : Erikala Ramudu@Sake Ramanna RW.1 : P. Gowri Shankar PW.2 : Dr. Y. Kiran Kumar RW.2 : P. Manjula

Exhibits marked on behalf of the

Petitioner Respondents

Ex.A1:Certified copy of FIR. Ex.B1:Attested copy of policy Ex.A2:Certified copy of wound certificate Ex.B2:Legal notice Ex.A3:Certified copy of charge sheet. Ex.A4:Xerox copy of motor vehicle insurance cover note pertaining to the vehicle No.AP-02-TB-0554. Ex.X1:Authorization Ex.A5:Bunch of medical bills. Ex.A6: 1-B extract issued by Tahasildar Ex.A7: Report given by the S.V.Diagnostics. Ex.A8: Report given by the Satyam Diagnostics, Ananthapuramu Ex.A9: Discharge summary of Pavani Hospital, Ananthapuramu Ex.A10: Discharge card issued by GGH, Ananthapuramu Ex.A11: X-Ray films total six numbers.

Ex.C1:Case Sheet.

III Addl. District Judge,(FTC)

Ananthapuramu.

1

IN THE COURT OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL

ANANTAPURAMU

(BEFORE III ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE (FTC), ANANTAPURAMU)

PRESENT: Smt. B. SUNITA, III ADDL. DIST. JUDGE,

Wednesday, the 19 th day of April, 2017

ORIGINAL PETITION NO.402/2016.

Between:-

1. Gongati Obi Reddy

2. G.Subbalakshmamma … Petitioners

And

1. K. Babji Naik

2. K. Vijaya Kumar Naik… Respondents

This petition coming on 19.04.2017 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri Y. Rameswara Reddy, Advocate for the petitioners and respondents are called absent set exparte and the matter stood over for consideration till this day, the court made the following:-

O R D E R

1.Petition is filed Under Section 140 and 166 of Motor Vehicles

Act, 1988 and Rule 455 of AP Motor Vehicles Rules 1989, claiming compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- for the death of G. Aravinda Reddy in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 06.03.2016 at about 3-40 pm., near Nyamaddala Bus stop, on N.S.Gate to

Dharmavaram Road, Ananthapuramu District due to rash and negligent driving of driver of crime jeep bearing No.AP-02-AA-2133.

2

2.Case of petitioners is that on 06.03.2016 at about 3-40pm., the deceased boy went to participate in meeting of Chiguru Bala Sanghar of

Tumbuct Organization at C.K.Palli at about 8-00am., After completion of meeting at about 3-30pm., he got down from the bus near his village and while standing left side of the road, crime jeep bearing No.AP-02-AA-2133 driven by first respondent in a rash and negligent manner with high speed came without blowing any horn and hit the deceased on Dharmavaram –

N.G.Gate Road. Due to said accident, deceased received severe injuries and immediately he was shifted to Government General Hospital,

Dharmavaram for treatment. But there doctor after examining him declared dead.

3.Deceased was aged about 12 years, hale and healthy, studying 7th class. He was good in studies and actively participating in extra curricular activities. Chiguru Bala Sangham conducted by Timbuct Group, a voluntary non Governmental Organization in social activities. Due to his sudden demise petitioners are suffering.

4.As the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of jeep bearing No.AP-02-AA-2133, C.K.Palli Police registered a case in Cr.No.28/2016 U/S 304-A IPC and also Sec.196 (A) of M.V.Act against its driver as the jeep was not insured. First respondent is driver, second respondent is owner of crime vehicle jeep bearing No.AP-02-AA- 2133. Hence petition is filed claiming compensation jointly and severally from both respondents.

3

5.Respondents remained ex-party. In fact in this case was not certified and them, hence they were absent. Since R1 and R2 remained absent for the second time also, substitutely services was ordered.

Respondents remained exparte.

6 . To prove his case, petitioners examined Pw1 and marked Ex.A1 to

Ex.A6.

Issue No. I :-

8.Pw.1 is father of deceased. During his chief examination he deposed that on 06.03.2016 at about 3-40pm., when the deceased boy was returning after participating in meeting of Chiguru Bala Sangham of

Tumbuct Organization at C.K.Palli at about 8-00am., he got down from the bus near his village and while standing on the left side of the road, crime jeep bearing No.AP-02-AA-2133 driven by first respondent in a rash and negligent manner with high speed came without blowing any horn and hit the deceased on Dharmavaram – N.G.Gate Road. Due to said accident, deceased received severe injuries and immediately he was shifted to Government General Hospital, Dharmavaram for treatment. But there the doctor after examining him declared dead.

9.To prove the accident petitioner has marked Ex.A1 attested copy of

First Information Report, Ex.A2 attested copy of inquest report in

Cr.No.28/2016 of C.K.Palli Police station and A6 is attested copy of charge 4 sheet. Both these documents reveal manner of accident as stated by petitioner. Ex.A4 is attested copy of MVI report and it also discloses that the crime vehicle was in good condition at the time of accident. Hence, it is concluded that the accident occurred as stated by petitioners.

10. According to petitioner deceased was aged about 12 years. A perusal of Ex.A2 and Ex.A3 which are inquest report and Post Mortum

Report reveal that, deceased was aged about 12 years. He was studying 7th class. But in this case there is no study certificate to show that the deceased was brilliant student as contended by the petitioners. However in this case it appears that the deceased boy was actively participating in different activities in addition to studies. In fact the accident occurred while deceased boy was returning after attending to a social activity as per the documents filed on behalf of the petitioners.

11.Learned advocate for petitioners relied on judgments in between 1)

Kishan Gopal & another Vs. Lala and others, reported in (2013) 0

Supreme (SC)781 2) R.K.Malik & Anr. Vs. Kiran Pal and Others, reported in (2009) 2 CCR (SC) 1044 3). Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Vs.

Surendra Kumar and others, reported in (2007) 0 Supreme (All)598 and argued that as held in said judgments when the deceased is aged between 10 to 15 years, a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- should be awarded towards compensation as held in said judgments. It was also argued that as held in said judgments discussed above second schedule has fixed notional income of Rs.15,000/- per annum for unemployed during 1994 5 and national income was taken as per value of rupee during 1994, but in present case the accident occurred on 06.03.2016 i.e., nearly 22 years later, due to depreciation in rupee value from 1994 to till now, it is apt to take notional income as Rs.30,000/- per annum. Therefore, said judgments are considered while awarding compensation as cost of living has risen more than double from 1994 to 2016 and also due to depreciation in value of rupee.

12.Hence National income is taken as Rs.30,000/- per annum and taking young age of deceased and his parents a sum of 30,000 x 15 = 4,50,000/- is awarded towards loss of income.

And another sum of Rs.50,000/- is awarded under conventional heads towards loss of love and affection, funeral expenses etc.,

Therefore, in total a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- is awarded towards compensation.

13. As per directions of our Hon'ble High Court in judgment between The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Rep by its Branch

Manager, Branch Office at Pragathinagar, Station Road, Peddapally,

Karimnagar District and another Vs. Margam Padmavathi,

W/o.Late Kumara Swamy and five others in MACMA No. 188/2007

dated:16-12-2014 send the copy of order to Regional Transport

Authority, Anantapuramu concerned for necessary action. Therefore, this issue is answered accordingly.

6

14. In the result petition is partly allowed with proportionate costs. A sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five lakhs only) is awarded towards compensation with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. Both the respondents are jointly and severally held liable for payment of compensation. If they fail to deposit the amount within two months from the date of this order, they are directed to pay interest @ 9% per annum from the date of this petition till the date of realization. On deposit of the amount, both the petitioners are entitled to receive equal shares and permitted to withdraw 50% of their shares of compensation amount at once and remaining 50% shall kept in fixed deposit in any nationalized bank for a period of one year. The amount if any awarded U/S. 140 of MV. Act shall be deducted from this amount.

Advocate fee is fixed at Rs.5,000/-.

Dictated to Stenographer transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced

by me in the open court, on this the 19th day of April, 2017.

III Addl. District Judge, F.T.C, Anantapuramu.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

Petitioners:- Respondents:- PW.1 : Gongati Obi Reddy Nil

Exhibits marked for

Petitioner Respondents Ex.A1 : Attested copy of FIR. Nil Ex.A2 : Attested copy of Inquest report. Ex.A3 : Attested copy of PME. Ex.A4 : Attested Copy of MVI report. Ex.A5 : Attested copy of rough sketch. Ex.A6 : Attested copy of charge sheet.

III Addl. District Judge,

Fast Track Court,

Ananthapuramu.

7

IN THE COURT OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL::

ANANTAPURAMU

(BEFORE III ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE (FTC), ANANTAPURAMU)

PRESENT: Smt. B. SUNITA, III ADDL. DIST. JUDGE,

Wednesday, the 19 th day of April, 2017

ORIGINAL PETITION NO.402/2016.

Between:-

1.Gongati Obi Reddy, S/o. Late Naganna, Hindu, aged about 35 years, agriculture.

2.G.Subbalakshmamma @ Subba Lakshmi, W/o.G. Ob Reddy, Hindu, aged about 30 years, house wife. (Both are residing at Basinepalli Village, Nagasamudram Post. C.K.Palli, Mandal, Ananthapuramu District) … Petitioners

And

1.Kimavathi Babji Naik, S/o. Late Lakshma Naik, hindu, aged about 34 years, driver, D.No.3- 94, Ganginepalli Thanda Village, C.K.Palli Mandal, Ananthapuramu District. (Driver of the Scorpio Jeep, bearing No.AP-02-AA-2133) K. Vijaya Kumar Naik, s/O. k.rAMASWAMY Naik, Hindu, aged about 40 years, D.No.3/89, 2. Ganginepalli Village, C.K.Palli Mandal, Ananthapuramu District. (Owner of the Scorpio Jeep bearing NO.AP-02-AA-2133) … Respondents

Petition is filed Under Section 140 and 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Rule 455 of AP Motor Vehicles

Rules 1989, claiming compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- for the death of G. Aravinda Reddy in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 06.03.2016 at about 3-40 pm., near Nyamaddala Bus stop, on N.S.Gate to

Dharmavaram Road, Ananthapuramu District due to rash and negligent driving of driver of crime jeep bearing No.AP-02-AA-2133.

Petition presented on: 30.09.2016.

Value for Court fee is Rs.6,00,000 /­ and a Court fee of Rs.5,360/­is paid under Rule 475 (2) of 

A.P.M.V. Rules. 

This petition coming this day for disposal before me in the presence of Sri Y. Rameswara

Reddy, Advocate for the petitioners and respondents are called absent set exparte and the matter stood over for consideration till this day ; DOTH ORDER AND DECREE:- //2//

1.That the petition be and the same is hereby partly allowed with interest and proportionate costs.

2.That the sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only) is awarded towards compensation with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition i.e., 30.09.2016 till the date of realization.

3.That the both respondents are jointly held liable for payment of compensation.

4.That they fail to deposit the amount within two month from the date of this order, they are directed to pay interest @ 9% per annum from the date of this petition till the date of realization.

5.That the deposit of the amount, both the petitioners are entitled to recei ve equal shares.

6.That the compensation amount is permitted to withdraw 50% of their shares at once.

7.That the remaining 50% shall kept in fixed deposit in any nationalized bank for a period of one year.

8.That the amount if any awarded U/S.140 of MV Act shall be deducted from this amount.

9.That the Advocate fees is fixed at Rs.5,000/-

10. That the respondents do pay to the petitioners a sum of Rs.10,922/­ towards proportionate costs of the petition and do bear their own costs of Rs.2­00 (Other costs not certified)

Given- under my hand and seal of the court this the 19th day of April, 2017.

III Addl. District Judge,

Fast Tack Court,

Ananthapuramu.

TABLE OF COSTS FOR

Petitioner Respondents Rs. Ps Rs. Ps Stamp on main petition5,360-00-- Stamp on vakalath2-002-00 Process50-00 Stamps on petition10-00 Publication charges1,300-00 Typing charges100-00 Writing charges100-00 Advocate's fee5,000-00 Total 11,922-002-00 (F.C memo not filed other costs not certified)

Proportionate Cost of Rs.10,922/-

III Addl. District Judge,

Fast Track Court,

Ananthapuramu.

IN THE COURT OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL:

ANANTHAPURAMU.

PRESENT: Smt. B. SUNITA,

III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, FAST TRACK COURT, ANANTHAPURAMU.

Friday, the 21 st day of April, 2017.

ORIGINAL PETITION NO.491/2015.

Between:-

1. Erikala Ramudu @ Sake Ramanna, S/o.S.Nagappa, Hindu, aged about 38 years, agriculturist , resident of Muddalapuram Village, Brahmasamudram Mandal, Ananthapuramu District.

...Petitioner

A n d

1.Boya Setteppa, s/O. b.eRAPPA, HINU, MAJOR, d.nO.1-246, Muddalapuram Village, Brahmasamudram Mandal, Ananthapuramu District. (Owner of the Vehicle no.AP-02-TB- 0554)

2.National Insurance Co. Ltd., Rept. By its Divisional Manager, R.F.Road, Ananthapuramu. (Insurer of the vehicle No.AP-02-TB-0554)

3.Sanna Marenna, s/O. Setteppa, hindu, driver, major, Muddalapuram Village. Bramhasamudram Mandal, Ananthapuramu District. …Respondents

Petition is filed Under Section 140 & 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Rule 455 of AP Motor Vehicles

Rules 1989, claiming compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by petitioner Erikala

Ramudu @ Sake Ramanna in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 22.01.2013 at about 3-00 am., near

Belodu Village, due to rash and negligent driving of driver of crime TATA ACE Vehicle bearing

No.AP-02-TB-0554.

Petition presented on: 10.11.2015.

Value for Court fee is Rs.6,00,000 /­ and a Court fee of Rs.5,360/­is paid under Rule 475 (2) of 

A.P.M.V. Rules. 

This petition coming this day for disposal before me in the presence of Sri. P.

Ravindranatha Reddy, advocate for the Petitioner and respondent No.1 and 3 are set exparte and

Sri. M. Venu Gopal, advocate for respondent No.2, the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, DOTH ORDER AND DECREE:- //2//

1.That the petition be and the same is hereby partly allowed with interest and proportionate costs.

2.That the sum of Rs.2,27,000/- (Rupees two lakhs twenty seven thousands only) is awarded towards compensation with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition i.e., 10.11.2015 till the date of realization.

3.That the claim against second respondent is dismissed.

4.That the first and third respondents are jointly and severally held liable for payment of compensation.

5.That they fail to deposit the amount within two months from the date of this order.

6.That they are directed to pay interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.

7.That the deposit of the amount petitioner is permitted to withdraw 50% at once.

8.That the remaining 50% shall be kept in fixed deposit in any nationalized bank for a period of one year.

9.That the amount if any awarded U/S.140 of MV Act shall be deducted from this amount.

10. That the Advocate fees is fixed at Rs.2,000/-

11. That the respondents do pay to the petitioners a sum of Rs.3,892/­ towards proportionate costs of the petition and do bear their own costs of Rs.2­00 (Other costs not certified)

Given- under my hand and seal of the court this the 21st day of April, 2017.

III Addl. District Judge,

Fast Tack Court,

Ananthapuramu.

TABLE OF COSTS FOR

Petitioner Respondents Rs. Ps Rs. Ps Stamp on main petition5,360-00-- Stamp on vakalath2-002-00 Process50-00 Stamps on petition10-00 Typing charges100-00 Writing charges100-00 Advocate's fee2,000-00 Total 7,622-002-00 (F.C memo not filed other costs not certified)

Proportionate Cost of Rs.3,892/-

III Addl. District Judge,

Fast Track Court,

Ananthapuramu.

IN THE COURT OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL:

PRESENT: Smt. B. SUNITA,

III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, FAST TRACK COURT, ANANTHAPURAMU.

Tuesday, The 18 th day of April, 2017.

ORIGINAL PETITION NO.400/2013.

Between:-

Kuramala Nallappa, S/o. Papanna, aged about 58 years, Hindu, business and cultivator, residing at Chinnavaripalli Village, Talapula Mandal, Ananthapuramu District.

...Petitioner

A n d

1.A. Arjuna, S/o. Venkatesu, major, Hindu, D.No.3/42, Gandhivaripalli Village, Thanakala Mandal. (Owner-cum-driver of Maxi Cab bearing No.AP-02-V-7856)

2.IFFCO TOKIO General Ins., Co. Ltd., Rep. By its Manager, Ananthapuramu. Insurer of Maxi Cab bearing No.AP-02-V-7856, VIDE COVER NOTE No.7613302, Valid from 08.02.2011 to 07.02.2012) …Respondents

Petition is filed Under Section 140 and 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Rule 455 of AP Motor

Vehicles Rules 1989, claiming compensation of Rs.1,20,000/- for the injuries sustained by petitioner

Kurumala Nallappa in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 20.02.2011 at about 3-00 pm., at

B.Kothapalli Village, Talupula Mandal, Ananthapuramu District, due to rash and negligent driving of driver of crime Maxi Cab bearing No.AP-02-V-7856.

Petition presented on: 16.01.2013.

Value for Court fee is Rs.1,20,000 /- and a Court fee of Rs.560/-is paid under Rule 475 of A.P.M.V. Rules.

This petition coming this day for disposal before me in the presence of

Sri. A. Nagarjuna Reddy, advocate for the Petitioner and Sri. R. Rama Chandra, advocate for respondents No.1 and Sri. G. Seetharama Rao, advocate for respondent No.2, the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this tribunal; DOTH ORDER AND DECREE:- //2//

1.That the petition be and the same is hereby partly allowed with interest and proportionate costs.

2.That the sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Fourty thousands only) is awarded towards compensation with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition i.e., 16.01.2013 till the date of realization.

3.That the both respondents are jointly and severally held liable for payment compensation.

4.That they fail to deposit amount within two months from the date of this order, they are directed to deposit interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.

5.That the deposit of the amount, petitioner is permitted to withdraw entire compensation amount at once.

6.That the amount if any awarded U/S.140 of MV Act shall be deducted from this amount.

7.That the Advocate fees is fixed at Rs.1,500/-

8.That the respondents do pay to the petitioners a sum of Rs.2,162/- towards proportionate costs of the petition and do bear their own costs of Rs.2-00 (Other costs not certified)

Given- under my hand and seal of the court this the 18th day of April, 2017.

III Addl. District Judge,

Fast Tack Court,

Ananthapuramu.

TABLE OF COSTS FOR

Petitioner Respondents Rs. Ps Rs. Ps Stamp on main petition560-00-- Stamp on vakalath2-002-00 Process10-00 Stamps on petitioner50-00 Typing charges100-00 Writing charges100-00 Advocate's fee1,500-00 Total 2,322-002-00 (F.C memo not filed other costs not certified)

Proportionate Cost of Rs.2,162/-

III Addl. District Judge,

Fast Track Court,

Ananthapuramu.