THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY C.M.A.No.1794 of 1998 JUDGMENT: The appellants filed O.P.No.387 of 1991 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Nizamabad claiming a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation on account of the death of Rajender, son of the 1st respondent, husband of the 2nd respondent and father of the 3rd respondent. It was pleaded that on 24.08.1991, when the deceased was traveling in a bus bearing No.AP-25T-1280 owned by the 1st respondent and insured with the 2nd respondent, an accident occurred on account of involvement of another vehicle bearing No.AP 36T 1056 owned by the 3rd respondent and insured with the 4th respondent. the deceased was said to be a Teacher earning a sum of Rs.2,500/- per month and that he was aged about 22 years. The 1st respondent filed a counter affidavit opposing the O.P. It was pleaded that the vehicle bearing No.AP-25T-1280 was undergoing repairs in a shed from 22.08.1991 to 29.08.1991 and that the deceased did not board the said bus at all. According to him, the accident may have occurred on account of the involvement of the vehicle bearing No.AP- 36T- 1056. The 2nd respondent disputed not only the accident but also the existence of insurance policy in respect of the vehicle. The 3rd respondent remained ex parte and the 4th respondent filed a counter denying the liability. Though its order, dated 11.07.1996, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred on account of the rash and negligence on the part of the driver of vehicle bearing No.AP-25T-1280. The compensation was determined at Rs.1,22,100/- and it was apportioned among the appellants. However, the 2nd respondent was absolved from the liability. Hence this appeal. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants. The appellants were not clear as to their claim. There is any amount of uncertainty as to the involvement of the various vehicles. The numbers were substituted. On behalf of the appellants, P.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.6 were filed. On behalf of the respondents, R.Ws.1 to 5 were examined and Exs.B.1 to B.10 were filed. On the question as to the cause of the death of the deceased, a finding was recorded to the effect that it is on account of the rashness on the part of the driver of the vehicle bearing No.AP-25T-1280. The oral evidence was to the effect that the deceased was earning Rs.1,500/- per month. The Tribunal took the same at Rs.1,000/- per month and after undertaking certain calculations, it was held that the reasonable compensation payable on account of the death of the deceased would be Rs.1,22,100/-. Learned counsel for the appellant is not able to point out any serious defect in the said finding. So far as the liability on the part of the 2nd respondent is concerned, a categorical finding was recorded to the effect that there was no insurance coverage for the vehicle with the 2nd respondent. Even now, no policy is placed before this Court. Therefore, the C.M.A. is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 14.12.2011 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY C.M.A.No.1794 of 1998 Date: 14.12.2011 JSU