THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY C.M.A.No.3310 OF 2003 JUDGMENT: This civil miscellaneous appeal is filed against the decree and judgment dated 16.04.2003, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Judge, Karimnagar, in O.P.No.186/2000. The first respondent-owner of the vehicle is the appellant herein. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. 3. The facts are that on 17.12.1998 when the petitioner was traveling on a tractor along with others with a load of paddy bags from Elbaka to Jammikunta, when the tractor reached the cross-roads of Velbhapur village at 7.30a.m., first respondent drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, on account of which the tractor turned turtle on account of which the petitioner and others fell down and sustained grievous injuries and the petitioner suffered fracture of right thigh and simple injuries all over his body. He was shifted to M.J.M. Hospital, Warangal. He claimed compensation of Rs.70,000/-. Respondents 1 and 2 filed counters denying the petition averments contending that the petitioner and others forcibly boarded the tractor and the tractor was insured with R2. Respondent No.2 in his counter stated that the vehicle was not insured. On the basis of the pleadings, the following issues were framed:- 1. Whether the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle bearing No.AP-15-T-3745/3746 by it’s driver? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation, if so, to what amount and from whom? 3. To what relief? On behalf of the petitioner, P.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.A1 to A4 were marked. On behalf of the respondents, R.W.1 was examined and Ex.B1 was marked. 4. After considering the material on record, the learned trial Judge held that the petitioner is entitled for compensation of Rs.70,000/- and awarded the same and also held that the first respondent – the present appellant is liable for compensation as the accident has taken place on 17.12.1998, whereas the coverage of insurance was from 18.12.1998, i.e. only after one day of the accident. The said finding is challenged in this appeal. 5. Now, the point for consideration is whether there are any valid grounds for allowing the appeal? 6. In the grounds of appeal, the fact of there being no insurance at the time of accident is not at all pleaded and the grounds are that the opportunity was not given to the appellant that the accident did not take place on account of negligence of the driver of the tractor, that the claimant and others forcibly boarded the tractor etc., which are all not tenable, as no ground even of there being no insurance at the time of accident is taken, however, it would have been futile if taken also, hence there are absolutely no merits in this appeal and the same is liable to be dismissed. 7. Accordingly, the C.M.A. is dismissed. No costs. ______________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J. 22nd June 2010, Rns