THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD M.A.C.M.A. No. 1735 of 2005 Oral judgment: (Per N.V. Ramana, J.) This M.A.C.M.A. is directed against the order dated 03.05.2005, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- I Additional District Judge, Warangal, dismissing the petition in M.V.O.P. No. 477 of 2003 filed claiming compensation for the death of one Viyyala Chandraiah, who happens to be the husband of appellant No.1 and father of appellant Nos. 2 to 5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants-claimants and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance Company. The learned counsel for the appellants-claimants contended that the Tribunal committed an error in not believing the documentary evidence, namely Exs. A1, A2, A6 and A7 and the oral evidence of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 4, to hold that Tractor-Trailer, belonging to respondent No.1 and insured with respondent No.2-Insurance Company, was not involved in the accident, and as such, they are not liable to pay compensation. This contention of the appellants cannot be accepted. There is no doubt that the deceased was killed in an accident, but there is no evidence on record to show that the deceased was killed when the Tractor-trailer, belonging to respondent No.1 and insured with respondent No.2-Insurance Company, hit the Hero Honda of the deceased. P.W.1, who is the widow of the deceased has no knowledge of the accident. P.W.2, who was cited as a witness, in his evidence stated that he does not know whether the Tractor-Trailer was involved in the accident. Though P.W.4, who happens to be the wife of P.W.2 was introduced as a witness to speak about the accident, the fact remains, though P.W.4 stated that she and her husband, namely P.W.2, witnessed the accident, her version was no supported by the evidence of P.W.2. This apart, in the documentary evidence, on which the appellants placed reliance, there is no mention about the involvement of the Tractor-Trailer in the accident. In the absence of any positive evidence placed by the appellants to show that the deceased was killed when the Tractor-Trailer hit the Hero Honda on which the deceased was riding, merely filing the Registration Certificate of the Tractor-Trailer, without examining the driver, will not assist the appellants in any manner to show that the Tractor-Trailer was involved in the accident. In that view of the matter, no exception can be taken to the order under appeal passed by the Tribunal, holding that the Tractor-Trailer was not involved in the accident in which the deceased was killed. The M.A.C,.M.A. is devoid of merit, and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. _____________________ P. DURGA PRASAD, J. Dated: 28th November, 2011 KSR