MANTHENA SATYANARAYANA RAJU Vs. LAKKAMRAJU LAKSHMIKANTHAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JUDGMENT :This CMA was preferred by the driver of the lorry bearing No.AHP 3176 which belongs to the sixth Respondent, against the order of the Motor Vehicles Claims Tribunal, Krishna at Vijayawada in M.V.O.P No.74 of 1990 questioning the quantum of compensation awarded by the said Tribunal on account of the death of one Sesham Raju in an accident that was caused by the said lorry on 11-6-1989.

(2.) Respondents 1 to 5 being the legal heirs of the said Sesham Raju (deceased) made a claim for Rs.50,000/- before the Tribunal under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short "the Act") against the Appellant and the sixth Respondent. The Tribunal held that though there was negligence on the part of the Appellant there was no rashness in driving the lorry. Ultimately the Tribunal did not award the compensation under Section 110-A of the Act but awarded compensation under Section 92-A of the Act by granting a sum of Rs.25,000/- as no fault liability compensation by relying on a decision of a Single Judge of this High Court in New India Assurance Company Limited v, J.I. Reddy, 1995 (1) ALD 75.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the Appellant has submitted that though the Tribunal awarded compensation through its award, dated 31-10-1996, the decision of a Division Bench of this High Court in New India Assurance Company Limited v. Salapuriappa, 1996 (1) ALD 1244 (DB) = 1996 (2) ALT 330 was not brought to the notice of the Tribunal and, therefore, the Tribunal erroneously awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/- as no fault liability compensation, and requested this Court to reduce the amount to Rs. 15,000/- which is the amount permissible under Section 92-A of the Act.