HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL Nos.1988, 1989 and 2001 of 2003 COMMON JUDGMENT: In this batch of appeals, separate orders, dated 06-02-2003, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum II Additional District Judge, West Godavari at Eluru in O.P. Nos.784, 783 and 785 of 1998 are challenged. The National Insurance Company is the appellant. 2. Claimants in the respective O.Ps., approached this Court claiming compensation on account of the injuries sustained by them. It was stated that all of them were travelling in car bearing No.AP 5D 5112 owned by one Mr.D.S.V.N. Rama Rao and insured with the appellant. The accident is said to have occurred on 27-05-1998 at 3.30 AM at Payakaraopet on account of the rash and negligent driving by driver of the vehicle i.e. Mr.Nagaraju. The owner of the vehicle contested the matter by filing counter, almost sailing with the claimants. The actual contest in the OP was by the appellant herein. It was pleaded that the vehicle was put to use contrary to the one stipulated in law and that the amounts claimed in the OPs are excessive. The other grounds were also raised. The Tribunal awarded different amounts of compensation with interest at 12%. 3. Heard Sri Kota Subba Rao, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Y. Sudhakar for the 1st respondent. 4. The first ground pleaded by the appellant is that the vehicle was put to use, which is not permitted in law. To be precise, the contention is that the vehicle was overloaded. However, the plea was not substantiated before the Tribunal and this Court is not inclined to take any different view on that aspect. 5. The second contention is about the quantum of compensation. Here again, the Tribunal has taken the oral and documentary evidence into account and arrived at just and proper conclusions. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant is not able to point out that the compensation awarded under the respective heads is inappropriate. 7. The third plea raised by the appellant deserves consideration. The Tribunal awarded interest at 12% per annum. By any standard, it is excessive. In matters of this nature, the Supreme Court is awarding interest at 7%. 8. Hence, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are partly allowed reducing the rate of interest from 12% per annum to 7% per annum, but upholding the orders of the Tribunal in all other respects. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J November 05, 2011. KTL