THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED M.A.C.M.A.NO.1963 OF 2006 23rd APRIL, 2011 BETWEEN: NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, B.R.OFFICE, OLD CLUB ROAD, KHAMMAM .. APPELLANT AND ANGOTH SEVYA AND OTHERS .. RESPONDENTS THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED M.A.C.M.A.NO.1963 OF 2006 JUDGMENT: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the insurance company aggrieved by the order dated 28-4-2005 passed by the IV Additional District Judge (FTC-III) (Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal), Khammam in M.A.T.O.P.No.639 of 2001. The 1st respondent-Angoth Sevya is the injured and he filed the O.P. alleging that on 27-5-2000 at 8.30 A.M. he started from his house on his cycle to Nataraj Centre, Palwancha to meet one mestry Venkanna and when he reached Arunodaya tailor shop the auto bearing No.AP.20.U.3455 driven by the 2nd respondent-Sk.Habeeb came in the opposite direction, in a rash and negligent manner and with high speed dashed the cycle of the 1st respondent, as a result he fell down and received grievous injuries all over his body. Immediately after the accident he was shifted to Potu Venkata Ramaiah Memorial Hospital where he was given first aid and then shifted to Government Hospital, Palavancha and treated as in-patient for one week. During the course of treatment he got operated to his mandible region and a steel rod was inserted to both the fracture bones and he was advised by the doctors to take further treatment for six months and attend for medical check ups. It was averred by the 1st respondent that has spent Rs.5,000/- towards medical and other expenses. A crime was registered in Cr.No.51/2000 under section 337 IPC by Palavancha Police against the auto driver. It is further averred that the 1st respondent was hale and healthy prior to the accident and was earning Rs.65/- per day and that due to the accident he was bed ridden for three months. He filed the claim petition before the court below for an amount of Rs.50,000/-. It was pleaded that the injured was aged about 32 years at the time of the incident and was earning Rs.65/- per day. The 3rd respondent herein was the owner of the auto. While opposing the claim petition the appellant herein filed its counter. It denied the plea of the 1st respondent-claimant that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of 2nd respondent-driver. It also denied the age and avocation of the deceased. On the basis of the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues for trial: 1. Whether the petitioner by name Angoth Sevya sustained injuries due to rash and negligent driving of the auto bearing No.AP 20 U 3455 by its driver/R1? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to any compensation, if so, to what amount and from which of the respondents? 3. To what relief? During the course of enquiry, on behalf of the respondent No.1- claimant he got examined as P.W.1 and Exs.A1 to A5 were marked on his behalf. On behalf of the appellant-insurance company none was examined and Ex.B1 was marked, i.e. insurance policy. Before the Tribunal, no contrary evidence was produced by the respondents regarding rash and negligent driving of the driver. It is admitted in the counter of the insurance company itself that the owner and the driver of the crime vehicle, who are able persons to disprove the version of the claimant, are set ex parte and not contested the case. The Tribunal after analysing the evidence on record and on appreciation of the same, opined that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the auto belonging to 3rd respondent- owner and it accordingly awarded an amount of Rs.69,000/- in all with interest @ 9 % p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization against all the respondents jointly and severally. It also directed to deposit the awarded amount within one month from the date of order. Aggrieved by the award passed by the Tribunal and also the rate of interest @ 9 % p.a., the appellant-insurance company filed the present appeal. Sri.C.V.Rajeeva Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant-insurance company contended that the Tribunal erred in granting 9 % interest. He further contended that the basis adopted for determining the compensation is also incorrect. Learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent-claimant on the other hand, supported the impugned award of the Tribunal and stated that the Tribunal while taking into account the age and earnings of the deceased, has rightly applied the multiplier and awarded the compensation and interest @ 9 % p.a. and the same does not require any interference. The main contention advanced by learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant-insurance company is regarding the rate of interest @ 9 % p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation which is on the higher side. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, ends of justice would be met if the rate of interest is reduced from 9 % per annum to 7 % per annum. The appeal is accordingly allowed in part by reducing the rate of interest from 9 % to 7 % per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation. No costs. _______________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J Date: 24-03-2011. TNB THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED M.A.C.M.A.NO.1963 OF 2006 Dated: 23-4-2011.