S RAMANA ALIAS RAMANA REDDY Vs. T VENKATESWARLU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE the subject matter of these appeals arises out of the same accident and the parties are one and the same, both the Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) M.A.C.M.A.No.2772 of 2007 is filed by the claimant and M.A.C.M.A.No.198 of 2008 is filed by the Oriental Insurance Company against the order, dated 21.3.2007 passed in O.P.No.1948 of 2000 by the Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

(3.) THE first respondent-owner of the lorry remained ex parte. THE second respondent-insurance company filed counter denying that the petitioner is an industrialist and was earning Rs. 20,000/- per month. It disputes the manner of the accident as averred in the claim petition as well as the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the lorry. It is stated that the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the Maruthi Esteem driven by the petitioner and the owner of the Maruthi Esteem and its insurer are necessary parties to the petition. THE wound certificate discloses that the injuries are simple in nature and the Doctors have assessed the partial disability at 50%. Further, it is stated that the petitioner was driving a new car, without temporary registration and contrary to the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act. THE petitioner was recovered completely after being treated in NIMHANS, Bangalore and the claim made by him is highly excessive and without any basis. It is denied that the petitioner is unable to sit or walk freely and suffering from severe head ache and reeling sensation or with any neurological problem. Further, it is stated that the petitioner would not be put to any loss as he is a share holder in Akhil Ceramics Limited.