THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO C.M.P.No. 22623 of 2003 and / in M.A.C.M.A. No. 1350 of 2011 JUDGMENT: Notice to respondents 1 and 2 is dispensed with since the petition against the respondent No.1 was dismissed and the respondent No.2 remained ex parte. Sri K.Subbarao represents the Oriental Insurance Company, who is the 3rd respondent herein. Therefore, the petition for condonation of delay in C.M.P.No.22623 of 2003 is allowed. Admit the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. Heard. The appeal is filed by the claimants against the dismissal of the M.V.O.P.No.554 of 1999 for compensation consequent on the death of the deceased B.Tulsya in a motor accident. According to the case of the claimants on 14.10.1998 at about 7.30 PM when the deceased was returning to his house on foot, a tractor bearing No.AP 36 I 6044 driven by the 1st respondent in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the deceased for which he died. As a result of which the petitioners suffered loss of dependency and also love and affection. The Insurance Company disputed the nature of the incident. The income of the deceased and the dependency of the petitioners is also disputed. On behalf of the petitioners P.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and marked Exs.A-1 to A-4. On behalf of the respondents, no oral evidence was adduced and marked Exs.B-1 to B-4. After considering the evidence on record, the lower Tribunal has dismissed the application finding that there is no proof of involvement of the tractor on the alleged date. The point for consideration is whether the award dated 18.12.2002 of the lower Tribunal is legal and sustainable? POINT: Learned counsel for the appellants submits that there is direct evidence of P.Ws.2 and 3 about the nature of the incident and though there are some minor contradictions the lower Tribunal has not properly appreciated the evidence and erred in dismissing the claim application when the police also have filed the charge sheet about the involvement of the vehicle and also the death of the deceased. The particulars mentioned in the inquest report and also the minor contradictions could not have been given much importance according to the learned counsel for the appellants. It was also pleaded by him that if an opportunity is given, the claimants will examine the Investigating Officer, who filed the charge sheet to establish the truth of the incident. Therefore, in view of the circumstances that the death of the deceased was found to be in a motor accident and as the police have found the truthfulness of the version of the petitioners, I feel an opportunity to further evidence can be given to the appellants, in the interest of justice as the death of the deceased caused sufferance to the petitioners. Therefore, the appeal is allowed and the matter is remanded to the lower Court by giving an opportunity to the claimants to examine the Investigating Officer, who has filed the charge sheet to prove the truthfulness of the version of the claimants. The respondent is also at liberty to adduce any further evidence. The lower Court is directed to dispose of the case within six months. With the above observation, the appeal is allowed. No costs. ________________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO, J 01-07-2011 MR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO C.M.P.No. 22623 of 2003 and / in M.A.C.M.A. No. 1350 of 2011 DATE: 01-07-2011 MR