The claimants filed the present appeal aggrieved by the
award dated 19.10.2018 in M.V.O.P.No.832 of 2017passed by
the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-VI
AdditionalDistrict Judge, partly allowing the claim petition by
granting compensation at Rs.3,00,000/-,as against the claim of
Rs.75,00,000/-, with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition
till the date of realization, payable by the respondents 1 to 3
jointly and severally for the death of the deceased Hari Gopal in a
motor accident that occurred on 22.03.2014.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred as
they are arrayed before the Tribunal.
3. The claimants filed the claim petition under Section 166 of
the Motor Vehicles Act read with Rule 455 of the Motor Vehicles
Rules, claiming compensation of Rs.75,00,000/- for the death of
Hari Gopal, (hereinafter referred as deceased) in a motor
accident occurred on 22.03.2014. On the date of incident, the
deceased Hari Gopal went to Neelakundilu on his motorcycle
bearing No.A.P.31-BE-17 and on the return journey, when he
reached near Mamidilova, one Elcher Van bearing No.AP 31-TU-
9219 being driven by the 1st respondent, suddenly applied brakes
without giving any signal in a rash and negligent manner,as a
result of which, the deceased, who was following the van went
and dashed the same at about 10.30 p.m. and sustained serious
injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to K.G. Hospital and while
undergoing treatment on 23.03.2014 at about 12.25 p.m. he
succumbed to injuries. A case in Crime No.66 of 2014 was
registered by the SHO, Anandapuram Police Station under
Section 304-A IPC against the 1st respondent. The deceased,
who was aged about 48 years, was working as Junior Manager
(Operation) in RINL, Sinter Plant, Steel Plant, Visakhapatnam and
was earning a gross salary of Rs.53,811/- per month at the time
of accident. The claimants have spent Rs.25,000/- towards
funeral of the deceased, Rs.5,000/- towards transportation of the
dead body. The 1st respondent being the driver, the 2nd
respondent being the owner and the 3rd respondent being the
insurer of the offending vehicle are jointly and severally liable to
pay the compensation. Hence, the claim petition.
[ad_1]
Source link