THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3022 of 2003 Date: 19-8-2010 Between The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Rep. by its Divisional Manager, Gudivada, Krishna district … Appellant/Respondent No.2 and 1. Poluboyina Panduranga Rao and another … Respondents/Petitioners 3. Sunkara Damodara Rao … Respondent/Respondent No.1 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3022 of 2003 Oral Judgment: Heard both sides. 2. This appeal is filed by the insurer challenging the order and decree dated 25-02-2002 in M.V.O.P.No.410 of 1997 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum III Additional District Judge, Vijayawada, Krishna district in awarding a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation to the petitioners as claimed by them for the death of their deceased son in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 01-4-1996 due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of driver of tractor cum trailor bearing Nos.AP16T-4508 and 4510, respectively, owned by respondent No.3 herein. 3. This is a case of death of a young man of 22 years. The case of the claimants is that while the deceased was going by a bicycle on the road, the offending vehicle hit from behind in a wrong side in a rash and negligent manner resulting in the death of the deceased. 4. The Tribunal, in this regard, had taken into consideration the evidence of P.W.2, who is an independent witness that the tractor cum trailor was proceeding at a high speed at the time of accident and went in a wrong side causing the accident and the Tribunal basing on his evidence, did not find any reason to disbelieve the same, for the reason that there was no contra evidence capable of dislodging the evidentiary value of the said witness. 5. That apart, the Tribunal also considered the evidence of R.W.1, which was mostly based on the recitals mentioned in the charge-sheet marked as Ex.B-4, wherein it was mentioned that the deceased was traveling on the sugarcane load at the time of accident. 6. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances, the Tribunal arrived at the conclusion that the death of deceased was only because of the rash and negligent driving of the tractor cum trailor by its driver. 7. But, what is obvious is that the Tribunal had tested the evidence on record, both oral and documentary, and the course of accident from it, however, eventually arrived at a conclusion that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle while the deceased was going by bicycle on the road. 8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with the award of the Tribunal. However, I am of the view that the rate of interest granted by the Tribunal is on higher side and the same is reduced from 9% to 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization. 9. In the result, the civil miscellaneous appeal is dismissed, confirming the order under appeal, however, reducing the rate of interest to the extent indicated above. Parties to bear respective costs. ________________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA 19th August, 2010. Ak THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3022 of 2003 19th August, 2010. (Ak)