NAGIRIPADU JAYA RAMAIAH Vs. SOMASILA GOPALA KRISHNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant, while travelling in a lorry belonging to the first respondent and insured with the second respondent, met with an accident due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry and filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act), seeking compensation of Rs. 55,000/- from the respondents for the disability caused to him due to the injuries received in the accident. He also filed another claim petition under Section 140 of the Act. Both the said petitions were clubbed.

(2.) Appellant examined himself as P.W. 1 and two other witnesses as P. Ws. 2 and 3 and marked Exs. A-1 to A-7. First respondent, though filed a counter contesting the petition, did not adduce evidence on his behalf either oral or documentary. Second respondent, who also contested the claim, examined one witness as R.W. 1 and marked Exs. B-1 and B.2. Having held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry, the Tribunal awarded Rs. 12,000/- in the O.P. filed under Section 140 of the Act and Rs. 7,250/- as compensation to the appellant against respondents 1 and 2 jointly and severally in the O.P. filed under Section 166 of the Act. Dissatisfied with the compensation awarded to him in the claim petition under Section 166 of the Act, claimant preferred this appeal.

(3.) The point for consideration is to what compensation is the appellant entitled to?