THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED C.M.A.No.3941 of 2003 JUDGMENT: The appellant-Insurance Company filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award, dated 22.04.2002, passed in O.P.No.691 of 2000 by the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional District Judge, Karimnagar (for short ‘the Tribunal’). 2. The facts, in brief, are as follows: On 22.11.1997, one Katepalli Sanjeev Reddy, his wife and daughter were proceeding on a jeep from Muthyampet village of Domakonda Mandal of Karimnagar District to meet his son, who is studying in residential school at Karimnagar and when it reached Padmanagar Sub-Station at about 8.00 PM, APSRTC bus bearing No.AP-10-Z-1044 of Sricilla Depot, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and when he tried to overtake the tractor, dashed the jeep from opposite direction, as a result of which, Sanjeev Reddy and his wife died on the spot and their daughter sustained grievous injuries. The first and second respondents/claimants, the son and daughter respectively of the deceased Sanjeev Reddy, being minors represented by their grand father, filed the above said O.P. claiming compensation of Rs.8,00,000/-payable by the appellant-insurer and the third respondent-driver of the crime vehicle. Both the insurer and the driver have contested the matter by filing their respective counter- affidavits. By the award impugned, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.7,20,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of the petition till realization payable by the appellant and the third respondent jointly and severally. Questioning the said compensation, the appellant-insurer filed the present appeal. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the Tribunal was not justified in taking the annual income of the deceased at Rs.60,000/- on agriculture and Rs.15,000/- towards commission in Agro Seeds as the said income is seasonal. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the first and second respondents/claimants contended that the father of the deceased, who was examined as P.W.1, has clearly and categorically stated that the deceased was owed Acs.15.00 of land at Muthyampet village of Domakonda Mandal of Nizamabad District and was getting Rs.5,000/-per month as Commission Agent in Agro Seeds and Rs.30,000/-per annum on agriculture and that the deceased was also awarded ‘Adarsha Raithu Pathakam’ and therefore, the Tribunal has rightly awarded compensation, which need not be interfered with by this Court. 5. It is not in dispute that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of APSRTC bus at the time of accident. The dispute is with regard to the annual income of the deceased at the time of accident. P.W.1, the father of the deceased, stated that the deceased Sanjeev Reddy was aged 34 years and was working as Commission Agent in Agro Seeds at Thupran of Medak District at the time of the accident, apart from agriculture work as he owned Ac.15.00 of land at Muthyampet Village of Domakonda Mandal of Nizamabad District. His son was getting Rs.5,000/-per month as a Commission Agent and Rs.30,000/-per annum on agriculture. He also produced Ex.A7- Pattadar passbook, Ex.A8-title deed issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Ex.A9-receipts issued by the Market Committee, Ex.A11-report of agriculture department. Based on the evidence and the material documents, the Tribunal determined the annual income of the deceased at Rs.75,000/-on agriculture and as Commission Agent in Agro Seeds and rightly awarded compensation of Rs.7,20,000/- by the award impugned and the same cannot be interfered with by this Court. Insofar as the interest @ 9% per annum awarded by the Tribunal is concerned, it is reduced from 9% to 7%. The award of the Tribunal in all other aspects shall remain unaltered. 6. With the above modification, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed in part. No costs. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J Date:05.08.2010 sj