THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.M.A.No.211 of 2001 JUDGMENT: The State has preferred this appeal against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, Chittoor, in M.V.O.P.No.423 of 1994, dated 17-08-1999. The said claim petition was filed by the claimants seeking compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- on account of the accidental death of Sri Noor Mohammad, who was the driver of the Government Jeep bearing No.A.P.3-A-12. In the claim statement, it is pleaded that the deceased was 32 years old and was working as driver of the said Jeep. While working in the Collector’s officer, Chittoor, he was getting a salary of Rs.1,580/- per month. It is alleged that on 16-09-1992 while Sri Noor Mohammad was driving the said Jeep from Chittoor towards Tirupati, the accident occurred at 9.30 p.m., when the lorry bearing No.ADQ-4451 dashed against the Jeep in a rash and negligent manner and that the deceased-Sri Noor Mohammad sustained injuries and died on the spot. The police registered a case in Cr.No.56 of 1992 and charge-sheeted the driver of the lorry in the court of IV Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chittoor, under Section 304-A IPC. In the said claim petition, the driver, permit holder and the owner of the lorry were impleaded as respondents 1 to 3 and the insurer of the lorry was impleaded as respondent No.4. The appellant herein i.e., the State of Andhra Pradesh was impleaded as the 5th respondent. The 3rd and 5th respondents before the Tribunal remained ex-parte. The Tribunal, on consideration of the evidence, found that the claimants are the only legal representatives of the deceased and that the accident occurred on account of the composite negligence of the driver of the offending lorry as well as the deceased-driver of the Jeep. The Tribunal, therefore, apportioned the liability at 35% as that of the appellant and 65% to that of the insurer of the lorry and the owner put together. The Tribunal also assessed the quantum of compensation and arrived at Rs.2,66,580/- towards loss of dependency and after adding conventional amounts towards loss of consortium and loss of estate, a total compensation of Rs.2,81,580/- was found payable. Since the claimants had restricted their claim to Rs.2,50,000/- only, the same was, therefore, awarded. Up to the extent of 35% of the liability fixed on the appellant, the present appeal has been filed. Heard the learned Government Pleader. Learned counsel submits that though the deceased-driver was found to be negligent at least to the extent of 35%, the liability so far as the State is concerned ought not to have been imposed. He also submits that the interest awarded at 12% per annum is, in any case, not warranted. I have considered the said contention. It is to be noted that the appellant did not participate in the proceedings before the Tribunal and remained ex-parte. It is also to be noted that the deceased was a driver employed by the State Government is also not in dispute. Irrespective of the acts of the driver being negligent or otherwise, the vicarious liability of the State, as the owner of the Jeep, cannot be brushed away. The State is, therefore, very much liable and the Tribunal has already found that the proportionate liability so far as the appellant-State is concerned to the extent of 35%. It is also to be noted that there has been no appeal preferred by the owner or the insurer of the lorry on whom 65% of the liability was imposed. The interest awarded by the Tribunal was the prevailing rate of interest, which was uniformly awarded in the year 1999 at the time when the O.P. was disposed of. The financial market today, therefore, has no relevance and it cannot be said that the interest awarded is excessive. Therefore, I do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the Tribunal and the same is accordingly confirmed. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Dated: 08-02-2010 Prv