\ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAV THURSDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 521 OF 2010 Between: M/s. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Rep. by its Divisional Manager, Holding office at P.B.No. 115, APSFC Buildings, 1st Floor, N.T. Road, Tirupati. ...Appellant / Respondent No.2 AND 1. K.Hemavathi, W/o. Late K.Munaiah, Hindu, Aged about 36 years, Occ: Housewife 2. K. Bhargav S/o late K. Munaiah, Hindu, Aged about 14 years 3. K. Meghana D/o late K. Munaiah, Hindu, aged about: 11 years. 4. K. Nagamunemma W/o late K. Siddaiah, Hindu, aged about: 60 years. Respondents 2 and 3 are minors, rep.by their Mother/natural guardian K, Hemavathi i.e. Respondent No.1 All are residing at Dasari Street, Chandragiri Mandal, Chittoor District, A.P. 5: At lyiohan Chetty S/o A. Krishnaiah Chetty, Hindu, Aged about: 40 years idlng at D.No.24/2103, Ram Nagar, Dargamitta, Nellore, Nellore District, A.P., Presently residing at Guravarajupalle village, Vedullacheruvu post, Renigunta Mandal, Chittoor District, A.P. 6. C.H. Veeraswamy Reddy S/o not known Residing at D.No.103, G.R.Palle village, Renigunta Mandal, Chittoor District, A.P. ...Respondents 1 to 4/Petitioners 1 to Respondent No.5 and 6/Respondent No.1 and 3 Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, praying thet the Highcourt may be pleased to allow the appeal by setting aside the Orders dated 09-11-2009 made in O.P.No. 257 of 2008 on the file of the Chairman Motor Accidents Cum Tribual cum III Additional District Judge, at Tirupati. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the trial Court and the material papers in the Suit and upon hearing the arguments of Sri. S A V RATNAM, Advocate, on behalf of the Appellant and Sri. Chandraiah Naidu for Respondent No.2. This Court Doth Order and Decree as follows:- 1. That the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal be and is hereby allowed. 2. That the award and decree dated 09.11.2009 in M.V.O.P.No.257 of 2008 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- III Additional District Judge, Tirupati be and is hereby are set aside and the claim petition is dismissed. 3. That there will be no order as to costs. Sd/- G HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// 0 SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Chairman Motor Accidents Cum Tribunal cum III Additional District Judge, at Tirupati. 2. Three CD Copies PR vna HIGH COURT DATED:08/05/2025 DECREE MACMA.No.521 of 2010 ALLOWING THE APPEAL IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 521 OF 2010 Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, praying thet the Highcourt may be pleased to allow the appeal by setting aside the Orders dated 09-11-2009 made in O.P.No. 257 of 2008 on the file of the Chairman Motor Accidents Cum Tribual cum III Additional District Judge, at Tirupati. Between: M/s. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Rep. by its Divisional Manager, Holding office at P.B.No. 115, APSFC Buildings, 1st Floor, N.T. Road, Tirupati. ...Appellant / Respondent No.2 AND 1. K.Hemavathi, W/o. Late K.Munaiah, Hindu, Aged about 36 years, Occ: Housewife 2. K. Bhargav S/o late K. Munaiah, Hindu, Aged about 14 years. 3. K. Meghana D/o late K. Munaiah, Hindu, aged about: 11 years. 4. K. Nagamunemma W/o late K. Siddaiah, Hindu, aged about; 60 years -♦ . Respondents 2 and 3 are minors, rep.by their Mother/natural guardian , K, Hemavathi i.e. Respondent No.1 All are residing at Dasari Street, Chandragiri Mandal, Chittoor District, A.P. 5. A. Mohan Chetty S/o A. Krishnaiah Chetty, Hindu, Aged about; 40 years. Residing at D.No.24/2103, Ram Nagar, Dargamitta, Nellore, Nellore District, A.P., Presently residing at Guravarajupalle village, Vedullacheruvu post, Renigunta Mandal, Chittoor District, A.P. 6. C.H. Veeraswamy Reddy S/o not known Residing at D.No.103, G.R.Palle village, Renigunta Mandal, Chittoor District, A.P. ...Respondents 1 to 4/Petitioners 1 to Respondent No.5 and 6/Respondent No.1 and 3 I.A. NO: 1 OF 2010(MACMAMP. NO: 1428 OF 2010) Petition under Section 151 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 operation of the judgment and decree dated 09-11- 2009 made in O.P.No. 257 of 2008 on the file of the Hon'ble Chairman, MACT-cum-lll Additional District Judge, at Tirupati, Chittoor District. I-A. NO: 2 OF 2012fMACMAMP. NO: 8241 OF 2012) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in supiDort of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to withdraw the amount of his share out of the amount deposited by the 1st respondent in MACMA^MP.No. 1428 of 2010 in MACMA.No. 521 of 2010 dt. 09/04/2010 herein in the interest of justice Counsel for the Appellant :SR1. S A V RATNANl Respondents Nc).2: SRI. CHANDRAIAH NAIDU Counsel for the The Court made the following Judgment: yi APHC010474792010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3311] Thursday, the eighth day of May, Two Thousand and Twenty Five Present The Honourable Ms Justice B.S.Bhanumathi Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.521 of 2010 Between: M/s. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Tirupati ...Appellant and ...Respondents K. Hemavathi and 5 others Counsel for the appellant: I.S.A.V.Ratnam Counsel for the respondents: Nil The Court made the following : JUDGMENT: This appeal is preferred under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles 1988 (in short ‘the Act’) against the award and the decree dated 09.11.2009, in M.V.O.P.No.257 of 2008 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - cum - III Additional District Judge, Tirupati, granting compensation of Rs. 13,66,895/- with interest @ 6% p.a., from the d^te Act, \ \ \ 2 BSB,J MACMA.No.521 of 2010 f ^ of petition till the date of realization with joint and several liability of the respondents No.1 to 3. The case of the claimants, is briefly, as follows: 2. On 07.02.2008, at about 7.00 p.m while K.Munaiah (the deceased) was going on his cycle near Thondawada cross, Chandragiri mandal on Chittoor-Tirupati by-pass road, a lorry bearing No.AP 16 Y 6602, being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the deceased and caused his death while undergoing treatment in S.V.R.R.G.G. Hospital for the injuries suffered in the accident. The Station House Officer, Chandragiri Police Station registered a case in Cr.No.21 of 2008 against the driver of the lorry. The deceased was aged 39 years and earning Rs.10,077/- per month as a Grade-ll technician in C.R.S. South Central Railway, Settipalle, Tirupati. The 1®* petitioner is the wife, the 2"'^ and 3’’'^ petitioners are children and the 4*^ petitioner is the widowed mother of the deceased. The 1®^ respondent who is the owner of the lorry filed counter contending that the accident happened due to the negligence of the deceased; that the driver of the lorry was very slowly and steadily driving the vehicle; and that the 2"*^ respondent who insured the lorry is liable to pay compensation, if any awarded. 3. The 2'^^ respondent filed counter opposing the claim stating that the lorry was not involved in the alleged accident and the claim was made by the petitioner in collusion with the 1®* and 3'"'^ respondents by fabricating the documents and managing the police, since the deceased died on account of an accident caused by hit and run of a vehicle. 4. 3 BSB,J ■ MACMA.No.521 of 2010 St petitioner as P.W.1: Smt.Dhanalakshmi as P.V\/.2; and Sk.Ghouse Basha as P.W.3 and filed EXS.A1 to A6. Through P.W.2, Exs.XI to X3 were marked. The claimants examined the 1 5. Ex.A1: Certified copy of F.I.R. in Crime No.21 of 2008 of Chandragiri Police Station. Ex.A2: Certified copy of charge sheet in Crime No.21 of 2008 of Chandragiri Police Station. Ex.A3: Certified copy of inquest report of deceased K.Munaiah. Ex.A4: Certified copy of post-mortem certificate of deceased K.Munaiah. EX.A5; Salary pay slip of the deceased K.Munaiah for the month of January 2008. EX.A6: Certified copy of Motor Vehicles Inspector’s report. Ex.XI: Service certificate (true copy) Ex.X2: Last pay certificate. Ex.X3: Compared copy of service register. On behalf of the respondents, no witness was examined, but a photostat copy of the letter dated 14.03.2008 was got marked as Ex.BI through P.W.1 in her cross-examination. After hearing both parties and considering the evidence, the Tribunal held that the accident was caused by the lorry in question and allowed the claim as aforesaid. Aggrieved by the award, this appeal was filed mainly challenging the observation of the Tribunal regarding the involvement of the lorry inspite of the evidence under Ex.BI and also that the quantum of 6. 7. 8. 4 BSB,J MACMA.No.521 of 2010 compensation is high since the salary was computed by deducting only professional tax and 1/4, instead of 1/3, of the salary towards the personal expenditure of the deceased. The learned counsel for the appellant contended as in the grounds of appeal. 9. In spite of service of notice on the 1®* and 4**^ respondents and the 2"^ and 3'"'^ respondents, being represented by their mother / 1 respondent as they were minors by then, there is no appearance. The notice sent to the 5**^ respondent to the address, as given before the Tribunal, was returned un-served. Hence, it is deemed to be proper service of notice. The 6*^ respondent remained ex-parte before the Tribunal. Hence, no further notice is necessary. 10. St The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident was caused by the aforesaid lorry, observing that as per the contents of the F.I.R., though it was reported that an unknown vehicle had hit and run away, since P.\N.3. who is an eye witness was examined by the investigating officer and laid charge sheet (Ex.A2) against the driver of the lorry and the insurance company had not taken any steps to appoint an investigator to find out whether the insured lorry was involved in the accident or not. 11. The accident occurred on 07.02.2008 and the F.I.R was laid shortly thereafter. Even as on 14.03.2008, when P.W.1 addressed a letter, there was no clue that this lorry was involved in the accident. It is only when the charge sheet was laid on 03.06.2008, the involvement of the lorry was alleged. There was occasion for the insurance company to get the matter investigated about the involvement of the vehicle in the accident as it was not informed. By the time the insurance company 12. 5 BSB,J MACMA.No.521 of 2010 was informed of the accident by sending notice in the claim petition, the chances of fair investigation by the investigator appointed by the insurance company would be meagre. The charge sheet does not explain as to how P. W.3 could be traced after so Jong time. As there is every possibility of false implication of an insured vehicle in an accident to make wrongful gain from insurance company, every endeavour must be made to rule out the possibility of false implication and ensure belief in the version. Except showing P.W.3 as an eye witness, no effort was made by the investigating officer to ensure credibility of the evidence of P.W.3. Though, normally high degree of proof beyond reasonable doubt, as in a criminal case, is not adopted in a claim under the Act, but when they raise high suspicion of false implication of an insured vehicle with a view to receive compensation. Court looks for more reliable evidence connecting the dots. Without seriously considering the defence, the Tribunal leaned in favour of the claimants just by placing reliance on the evidence of P.W.3 and the charge sheet and by pointing out the lapse of the insurance company. X This Court is of the view that the Tribunal erred in finding the involvement of the lorry in the accident without properly appreciating the evidence on record. Therefore, the award and the decree are liable to be set aside. 13. It is pertinent to mention that as per the order dated 09.04.2010, in M.A.C.M.A.M.P.No.1428 of 2010, interim stay was granted subject to the condition of the appellant depositing half of the awarded amount within a period of six (06) weeks and on such deposit being made, the respondents / claimants were permitted to withdraw the amount without furnishing any security. If the appellant deposited any such amount and 14. 6 ■\ , BSB,J MACMA.No.521 of 2010 -n the claimants withdrew it, the appellant may take steps for recovery of the same by filing an execution petition. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the award and decree dated 09.11.2009 in M.V.O.P.No.257 of 2008 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- III Additional District Judge, Tirupati are set aside and the claim petition is dismissed. 15. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand closed. Sd/- G HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Chairman Motor Accidents Cum Tribual cum III Additional District Judge, at Tirupati.(with records) 2. One CC to Sri. S A V Ratnam Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri. A. Chandriah Naidu, Advocate [OPUC] 4. The Section Officer, V.R Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. 5. Three CD Copies PR vna HIGH COURT DATED;08/05/2025 JUDGMENT + DECREE MACMA.No.521 of 2010 ALLOWING THE APPEAL