IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVAX FRIDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 676 OF 2024 Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, aggrieved by the decree and judgment passed in M.V.O.P No. 176 of 2016, dated 21.11.2023, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - cum - Judge, Family Court - cum - V Additional District Judge, Tirupati. Between; The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Represented by its Branch Manager, Kurnool. ...Appellant/Respondent No.3 AND 1. C Y Bala Gangi Reddy, Son of C Y Pulla Reddy, Aged about 58 years, Hindu, Businessman, Residing at D. No. 14-75, Krishna Reddy Colony, Near Auto Nagar Renigunta, Tirupati, Chittoor District. ...Respondent/Petitioner 2. K. Rami Reddy, (Died) 3. N. Shamford, aged about 55 years, S/o D.J. No. Ronha, Driver, Christian, Residing at K Buduguntapalle Village and post, Kadapa District, A.P. ...Respondents/Respondents lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 r/w Order 41 Rule 5 of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the execution of decree and judgment dated 21.11.2023 passed in MVOP No. 176 of 2016 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - Cum - Judge, Family Court - Cum - V Additional District Judge, Tirupati, pending disposal of the above appeal. lA NO: 5 OF 2024 Petition under Order 41 Rule 27 r/w Section 151 of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant leave to adduce additional evidence in respect of death of the owner of the vehicle/R-1, in the above M.A.C.M.A. in M.V.O.P No. 176 of 2016, dated 21.11.2023 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal -Cum- V Additional District Judge, Tirupati by filing copy of the death certificate issued by the Village Revenue Officer, Pinnapuram (VIII). Atmakur Mandal, Kurnool District. Counsel for the Appellant: Sri V Padmanabha Rao Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Sri V Nitesh Counsel for other Respondents: None Appeared The Court made the following: APHC010445302024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3311] FRIDAY ,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 676/2024 Between: The Oriental Insurance Company Limited ...APPELLANT AND C Y Bala Gangi Reddy and Others Counsel for the Appellant: ...RESPONDENT(S) 1.VPADMANABHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.VNITESH The Court made the following: 2 % MACMA.No.676 of 2024 JUDGMENT: Admit appeal. 02. This appeal is preferred against decree and award dated 21.11.2023 in M.V.O.P.No.176 of 2016 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional District Judge, Tirupati, granting compensation of Rs. 15,35,000/- with interest @6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit with joint and several liability against the 2^^ and 3'^'^ respondents therein, since the 1®' respondent died. The 3'^'^ respondent/insurance company preferred this appeal on the ground that the Tribunal failed to appreciate the contributory negligence of the injured/1®' respondent in the appeal and that the claimant failed to implead the owner and the insurer of the motor cycle of the claimant and therefore, the claim is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties; that the claimant failed to produce any evidence about his occupation or income and failed to consider the admission of the claimant that he was not an income tax assessee and that agreements under Ex.A13 to 16 relating to construction undertook by him were filed three years after filing the claim petition and the executants of the agreements were not examined; and that the Tribunal failed to properly appreciate the evidence of disability and awarded high amount of compensation ignoring that amputation below knee is 50% only as per the Workmen Compensation Act. 03. 04. Vide docket order of this Court dated 14.02.2025, in I.A.No.4 of 2024, additional grounds of appeal were filed with leave. p 3 MACMA.No.676 of 2024 The appellant additionally pleaded that in the judgment of the Tribunal, the respondent was shown as died and the notice was not served, nor was the legal representative added and then the company made enquiries and came to know that the respondent died on 21.07.2008, whereas the accident occurred on 09.08.2011 and the claim petition was filed on 05.08.2016 against the dead person as though he was alive. Therefore, the appellant/insurance company disowns its liability. 05. The appellant filed I.A.No.5 of 2024 along with photostat copy of death certificate of Kundhuru Rami Reddy, S/o K.Acchi Reddy, who is the 1®* respondent before the Tribunal. This would prima facie show that a detailed enquiry is required about the subsisting and valid contract of respondent as on the date of the accident. Moreover, the presence of legal representative(s) of the 1 respondent, if died, is required for adjudication of the liability of the owner of the crime vehicle which caused the injuries to the claimant. 06. St insurance in the name of the 1 St The learned counsel for the 1®* respondent/ claimant sought liberty to implead the legal representative(s) of the owner of the lorry, if the owner died. 07. Under the above circumstances, it is a matter fit to remand for fresh adjudication by the Tribunal. 08. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the award and decree dated 21.11.2023 M.V.O.P.No.176 of 2016 are set aside and the Tribunal is directed to conduct further enquiry after giving opportunity to both parties to take appropriate steps and adduce additional evidence in the light of the death of the 1®‘ respondent and expeditiously pass order afresh. 09. 4 IVlACMA.No.676 of 2024 There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- P U V BHASKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ft' Sf- SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Chairman Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - Cum - Judge, Family Court - Cum - V Additional District Judge, Tirupati, Chittoor District. 2. One CC to Sri V Padmanabha Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri V Nitesh, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Three CD Copies SAM sree HIGH COURT DATED; 14/02/2025 JUDGMENT + DECREE MACMA.No.676 of 2024 F I 13 MAR 2C25 | ^ . Currant Section . ^ o ALLOWING THE M.A.C.M.A. WITHOUT COSTS IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 676 OF 2024 Between: The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Represented by its Branch Manager, Kurnool. ...Appellant/RespondentNo.3 AND 1. C Y Bala Gangi Reddy, Son of C Y Pulla Reddy, Aged about 58 years, Hindu, Businessman, Residing at D. No. 14-75, Krishna Reddy Colony, Near Auto Nagar Renigunta, Tirupati, Chittoor District. ...Respondent/Petitioner 2. K. Rami Reddy, (Died), 3. N. Shamford, aged about 55 years, S/o D.J. No. Ronha, Driver, Christian, Residing at K Buduguntapalle Village and post, Kadapa District, A.P. ...Respondents/Respondents Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, aggrieved by the decree and judgment passed in M.V.O.P No. 176 of 2016, dated 21.11.2023, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - Judge, Family Court - cum - V Additional District Judge, Tirupati. cum Appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the Memorandum of Appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the lower Court and the material evidence on record and upon hearing the arguments of Sri V Padmanabha Rao, Advocate for the Appellant and Sri V Nitesh for the Respondent No.1, and none appeared for other Respondents. This Court doth order and decree as follows: 1. That the Appeal be and is hereby Allowed; 2. That the award and decree of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - cum - Judge, Family Court - cum - V Additional District Judge, Tirupati dated 21.11.2023 M.V.O.P.No.176 of 2016 be and are hereby set aside; 3. That the Tribunal be and is hereby directed to conduct further enquiry after giving opportunity to both parties to take appropriate steps and adduce additional evidence in the light of the death of the 1st respondent and expeditiously pass order afresh; 4. That there be no order as to costs in this appeal. Sd/- P U V BHASKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - Cum - Judge, Family Court - Cum - V Additional District Judge, Tirupati, Chittoor District. 2. Three CD Copies SAM sree HIGH COURT DATED:14/02/2025 DECREE MACMA.No.676 of 2024 fe 13 MAR 2C23 J ^ Current Section . ^ ALLOWING THE M.A.C.M.A. WITHOUT COSTS