NAGINENIN PRAMADA Vs. SARDAR NIRMAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the appellants/claimants for enhancement of amount against the award passed by the learned XV Additional Chief Judge-cum-I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad in O.P.No.2431 of 2004, dtd. 2/8/2008.

(2.) Heard Sri Kakara Venkata Rao, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and Sri A. Rama Krishna Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in holding that the driver of the Lorry was not having valid driving license, despite the fact that the Insurance Company did not adduce any evidence to prove the said allegation and they did not even examine any person connected with the document i.e., Ex.A9 - Attested copy of Driving Licence of Lorry Driver. Learned counsel further contended that the Tribunal ought to have taken into consideration, the income declared under Ex.A.27 - Attested copy of Saral Form for the assessment year 2004-2005 and the income received under Ex.A.29 - Attested Xerox copy of Form No.16 and also the income received from the Cinema Theaters for calculating the loss of dependency. The Tribunal also not applied proper multiplier and the reasons assigned by the Tribunal are erroneous and unsustainable. Therefore, he prayed this Court to enhance the compensation amount, as prayed for.