THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO C.M.A.No.2230 of 2003 JUDGMENT: This civil miscellaneous appeal is preferred aggrieved by the order and decree dated 17.02.2003 in O.P.No.462 of 1997 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Anantapur. The lower court in the aforesaid O.P. granted compensation of Rs.1,32,000/- against the claim of the appellants at Rs.1,75,000/-. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The appellants herein are the claimants in the main O.P. On 03.01.1996 at about 12.45 P.M. while the deceased along with his junior maternal aunt Shaik Mulla Madar Bee were proceeding by walk by pushing his four wheeler cycle cart loaded with bags on the extreme left side of the road, the driver of the lorry bearing No. AP 02 T 0595 belonging to the first respondent came from Penukonda side and dashed against the deceased from behind as a result of which, the deceased sustained multiple and grievous injuries all over the body and died within the compound of Government Hospital, Hindupur. The deceased was young and energetic person working as mechanic and was earning Rs.4000/- per month. Before the court below the first respondent remained exparte and the second respondent filed its counter denying all the allegations made in the petition. It is the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the appellants that the lower court erred in arriving at Rs.1200/- per month as the income of the deceased which is not in accordance with the evidence adduced on behalf of the appellants and the lower court ought to have granted the amount claimed while placing reliance on the evidence of the witnesses. It is further argued that the lower court instead of granting interest on the compensation amount from the date of petition granted the same from the date of award which is contrary to the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “the Act”) and therefore, prayed for enhancement of compensation. Now the point for consideration is whether the amount of compensation granted by the lower court is just and reasonable. Wife of the deceased was examined as PW1 and she examined PW2 who is an eye-witness to the accident and marked Exs.A1 and A2. On behalf of the respondents none were examined but Ex.B1 copy of insurance policy was marked. The manner of the accident was not disputed by the Insurance Company. A perusal of the evidence of PWs 1 and 2 it is clear that the deceased worked as mechanic and was aged about 48 years on the date of the accident as per Ex.A2 Inquest Report. Though PW1 in her evidence stated that the deceased was earning Rs.4000/- per month, she did not file any document to that effect. In the absence of such evidence, the income as recorded by the lower court is quite reasonable and needs no interference. However, since the lower court has granted interest on the compensation amount from the date of award which is contrary to the provisions of the Act, the appellants are entitled for interest on the compensation amount from the date of petition but not from the date of the award as correctly argued by the learned counsel for the appellants. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed granting interest on the compensation amount to the appellants from the date of petition. The findings of the lower court on other issues holds good. K.S.APPA RAO,J Dt. 04.02.2011 lvl THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO C.M.A.No.2230 of 2003 Dt. 04.02.2011