THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY C.M.A.No.809 of 2004 JUDGMENT: Golla Krishna, husband of the 1st respondent and father of respondents 2 and 3 and son of respondents 5 and 6, was an agriculturist by profession. He raised the copticum crop. After harvesting the same, he intended to take the produce to Kurnool Market Yard from his native place Hosur. Himself and other similarly situated farmers boarded a lorry, bearing No. AP 21 T 5694, owned by the 4th respondent and insured with the appellant. On the way, the vehicle met with accident and Krishna sustained serious injuries. He was shifted to Government General Hospital, Kurnool, and there he died, while undergoing treatment. Respondents 1 to 3 filed O.P.No.863 of 2001, claiming a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-, as compensation. The Tribunal passed an order dated 17.11.2003, awarding the compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-, with interest at 9%, per annum. This appeal is filed against the said order. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3. The 1st respondent deposed as PW.1 and has spoken about the occurrence of the accident and other facts. She filed Exs.A.1 to A.4, FIR in Crime No.2 of 2001, Post-mortem report, MVI report. Respondents 5 and 6 deposed as RWs.1 and 2. The Senior Assistant of the appellant deposed as RW.3 and he filed Exs.B.1 and B.2. The Tribunal found that the accident occurred, on account of rash and negligent driving of the vehicle. No serious challenge is made to the said finding. The Tribunal awarded the compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- by treating his income as Rs.1,500/- per month and after deducting one- third thereof. Though the Tribunal found that the claimants are entitled to Rs.2,20,000/-, it restricted the same to Rs.2,00,000/-, that was claimed in the O.P. The appellant is not able to point out any serious defect in the computation of compensation. Much argument is advanced about the liability of the appellant, stating that the deceased travelled as a passenger in a goods vehicle. The evidence on record discloses that the deceased was travelling along with the bags of copticum. Hence, he answers the description of owner of the goods. Though the rate of interest is a bit high, any reduction thereof would result in further loss to the respondents, who are not able to get adequate compensation due to non-payment of sufficient Court fee, particularly failure to amend the O.P. Hence, the C.M.A. is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dt:21.11.2011 GJ