THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.1459 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: Heard. 2. The appeal is filed against the award in O.P.No.342 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, Karimnagar, where-under for a claim of Rs.2,00,000/- made by the petitioners consequent on the death of the deceased Narsimha Reddy and also for the damages to the bulls. 3. The case of the petitioners is that the deceased while returning from his agricultural fields along with plough and reached the outskirts of Kothapalli village, a lorry bearing No. ATT 2944 driven by its driver, came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased, as a result of which, he died with injuries and one bull died. The petitioners are the dependants on him. The 3rd respondent filed a counter putting the petitioners to strict proof of rashness and negligence attributed to the driver of the lorry, earning capacity of the deceased and also the dependency of the petitioners. The lower Tribunal after considering the evidence on record, granted a compensation of Rs.1,45,000/- and apportioned the same to the claimants. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that the lower Tribunal has not properly appreciated the evidence with regard to the loss of the bull and granted a compensation of Rs.5,000/- only and so also for the loss of dependency. The lower Tribunal has not properly evaluated the evidence and therefore, the petitioners are entitled for the compensation as claimed. 5. So far as the loss of bull is concerned, the compensation granted by the Tribunal is a sum of Rs.5,000/- as against the claim of Rs.22,000/-. Even the statutory liability restricted for the payment of the compensation for loss of property to the insurance company is only Rs.6,000/-. Taking into consideration, the bull was purchased long time back, the lower Tribunal has fixed the compensation of Rs.5,000/- . So far as the loss of dependency is concerned, if one is to go into the merits of the case, the petitioners have at higher side since there was no deduction of 1/3rd from the earnings of the deceased. Even if the multiplier applied by applying the present laws, the quantum of compensation arrived at by the lower Tribunal is not less and it is on higher side. Therefore, the award of the lower Tribunal does not call for any interference. 6. Accordingly, Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO,J Date: 18.07.2011 INL