NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. VASIREDDY SUJATHARANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This MACMA and the Cross-Objections arose out of the order dated 06.01.2005 passed in MVOP No. 1270 of 2000 oh the" file of the Chairman, Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional District Judge, Guntur, (for short, 'the Tribunal'), whereby and where under the Tribunal allowed the petition filed under Sections 163-A and 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, (for short, 'the Act') and Rule 455 of the A.P. Motor Vehicles Rules, in part and granted compensation of Rs. 13,59,300/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of petition to the date of payment.

(2.) a) Vasireddy Sujatharani is the claimant in MVOP No. 1270 of 2000. Vasireddy Chandraiah @ Chandraiah Naidu is her father. Her father and mother were proceeding in a Maruti Car bearing registration No. AP 9B 1566 from Kavali to Guntur. Her father was driving the Maruti Car. On nearing Chagallu village a lorry bearing No. TDI 7677 came in high speed from opposite direction, driven in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the Maruti car. As a result, Maruti car got badly damaged, her father and mother received fatal injuries. Her father met with instantaneous death and whereas, her mother succumbed to the injuries while undergoing treatment in the Government Hospital, Kavali. Her father was a Reader and Head of Department of Commerce in Jawahar Bharathi Degree College, Kavali. He was earning Rs. 24,200/- per month. He did P.Hd. in Commerce. A case in Crime No. 76 of 2000 came to be registered against the driver of the lorry by the Station House Officer, Ulavapadu P.S. P. Yasoda Rani is the owner and the New India Insurance Company Limited is the insurer of the offended lorry. The owner and the insurer are liable to pay the compensation claimed by her jointly and severally. As on the date of accident, she was pursuing MBBS course. According to her, had her father alive, there would have been hike in his salary because of the revision of pay scales. She claimed compensation of Rs. 20,00,000/- for the untimely death of her father in the road accident.

(3.) The insurer filed MACMA No. 794 of 2007 under Section 173 of the Act questioning the very grant of compensation and whereas, the claimant filed cross-objections under Order 41, Rule 22 of Code of Civil Procedure, dis-satisfied with the quantum of compensation.