THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A. No. 1731 of 2011 JUDGMENT: Heard. It is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned counsel for the appellants that the owner of the vehicle, who was the 3rd respondent, preferred the appeal in C.M.A.No.2109 of 2004 questioning the order dated 26.02.2003 in M.V.O.P.No.365 of 1998 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam. The lower Tribunal granted a compensation of Rs.1,80,000/- fastening the liability against the owner of the car and did not fasten the liability on the A.P.S.R.T.C., the 2nd respondent therein. In the above judgment, this Court found that the liability was due to the fault of the driver of the bus only and the liability of the A.P.S.R.T.C. cannot be excluded. The amount of compensation was also enhanced by this Court in the above appeal. Therefore, in view of the judgment dated 17.06.2010 in C.M.A.No.2109 of 2004, this appeal does not survive for any consideration. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. ________________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO, J 16-08-2011 MR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No. 1731 of 2011 DATE: 16-08-2011 MR