THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO C.M.A.No. 1973 of 2003 JUDGMENT: The C.M.A. is preferred aggrieved by the order and decree dated 29.4.2002 passed in M.V. O.P.No. 86 of 1998 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam, on the following grounds: The lower Court without any basis arrived that the earning of the deceased is Rs. 3,000/- per month, which is excessive and needs to be scaled down. Now the point for consideration is whether the Order of the lower Court is just and reasonable? M.V.O.P.No. 86 of 1998 filed by legal representatives of the deceased claiming compensation of Rs. 5,54,000/-. The lower Court granted Rs. 3,03,000/-. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed. During the course of arguments, the accident was not disputed. The learned counsel for the appellant only urged that the basis to arrive the figure of Rs. 3,000/- towards the monthly earnings of the deceased is not justified. In the lower Court P.W-1 wife of the deceased was examined and also examined P.W-2. Ex.A-7 is the receipt evidencing that the deceased was doing fish business. Perused the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 and documentary evidence and consequently arrived that monthly income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- and accordingly, awarded the compensation. Admittedly, the age of the deceased is 40 years at the time of the accident. Therefore, viewed from any angle, and the circumstances of the case and evidence on record, the compensation granted by the lower Court for computing the income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- is quite reasonable and I see no grounds to interfere with the findings of the lower Court. Accordingly, the C.M.A. is dismissed confirming the Order of the lower Court. Print the name of Mr. K. Satyanarayana Murthy instead of Mr. P. Venkateshwarlu. ___________________ 3.2.2011 CHV