THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO C.M.A.M.P.No.18849 OF 2003 AND C.M.A.No.669 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: Respondent No.2 contested in the lower court and earlier batta was paid. In view of the circumstances stated in the petition the delay of 155 days in filing the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is condoned. 2. Admit. 3. The appeal is filed against the order in W.C.No.60 of 1998 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Nizamabad, questioning the compensation of Rs.1,48,977/- for the injuries said to have been caused to the 1st respondent, who was a labourer engaged on the Tipper bearing No. APH 7959 on 03.11.1997. According to the case of the claimant, the driver of the tipper drove the tipper in a rash and negligent manner, as a result of which, it turned turtle and the claimant received multiple injuries. The claimant pleaded that he suffered grievous injuries and spent money for medial examination. The appellant herein, who is the 1st respondent, disputed the liability and also the rashness and negligence attributed to the driver of the tipper. The 2nd respondent, who is the owner of the tipper, stated that the vehicle was insured with the appellant herein and there is no liability. After considering the material on record, the tribunal granted the compensation taking into consideration the earning capacity of the injured, and his age and also the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the compensation arrived at by the lower tribunal is not correct. Evidently, in order to support the claim of the petitioner apart from examining himself he has filed the documents Exs.A.3 to A.7 and also examined PW.2 the doctor, who treated him. The evidence on record clearly goes to show that the claimant has received multiple injuries and some of them are grievous in nature. The medical expenditure, which is likely to be incurred by the claimant, cannot be doubted. The tribunal has fixed the monthly wages of the claimant at Rs.1,800/- as against the claim of the claimant at Rs.2,600/- per month. The provisions of the Minimum Wages Act were applied and compensation was arrived at. I do not find any error in the application of the provisions in arriving at the compensation by the lower tribunal, so also the liability of the insurance company is indisputable as there was a valid policy covering three persons, who are labourers employed on the vehicle. Therefore, in view of the above circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with the award of the lower tribunal and accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs. _______________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO,J Date:01.07.2011 INL