THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO C.M.P.No. 28485 of 2003 and / in C.M.A. No. 681 of 2011 JUDGMENT: Notice to 1st respondent is dispensed with since the insurance of the vehicle was admitted and the award was not challenged by the Insurance Company. Therefore, the petition for condonation of delay in C.M.P.No.28485 of 2003 is allowed. Admit the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. Heard. The claim petition was filed for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- consequent on the death of the deceased Shaik Shabbir on 31.12.2000 in a motor accident. He was said to be a driver of the tractor belonging to the 1st respondent. There is no dispute about the accident or about the insurance of the vehicle or the dependency of the petitioners. The lower Tribunal has taken into consideration the evidence available on record i.e. the evidence of P.W.1, the wife of the deceased, and documents Exs.A-1 to A-7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the wages fixed by the lower Tribunal at Rs.2,000/- is too low and deduction of 50% is also not correct and the fixation of the compensation at Rs.1,69,440/- as awarded is not correct. Evidently, the deceased was the driver of the tractor and employee of the 1st respondent and he died in the course of employment. Though the owner of the vehicle, who is the 1st respondent, supported the payment of the salary as claimed by the dependants of the deceased. He was not allowed to show that so much of salary was paid by him. Therefore, the claim for salary at Rs.4,500/- cannot be accepted. Even taking into consideration during the year 2000 a technical employee will get only about Rs.2,000/- per month as against the labourer, who has been paid only Rs.1,500/- per month generally for the determination of the compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. Therefore, I do not find any error in the award of the Tribunal in fixing the income of the deceased. However, the learned counsel for the appellants submits that there are number of dependants and also three daughters to be married and reasonable compensation has to be fixed. Taking into consideration the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants and keeping in view of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act also, I feel the ends of justice would meet if the compensation is fixed at Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) as against the amount of Rs.1,69,440/- fixed by the lower Tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the claimants are found entitled for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) as compensation. No costs. ________________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO, J 01-07-2011 MR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO C.M.P.No. 28485 of 2003 and / in C.M.A. No. 681 of 2011 DATE: 01-07-2011 MR