B.Siva Sankara Rao, J. - (1.) THE Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for short, 'APSRTC Respondent in the claim petition filed this appeal, having been aggrieved by the Order/Award of the learned Chairman of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal -cum -District Judge, Chittoor, (for short, 'Tribunal') in M.V.O.P. No. 64 of 2001 dated 12.12.2003, against awarding compensation of Rs. 3,50,000/ - (Rupees three lakh fifty thousand only) with 9% p.a. interest as against the claim of the claimant (minor boy represented by mother guardian) for Rs. 4,00,000/ - (Rupees four lakh only), in the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act').
(2.) HEARD Sri P. Vinayakaswamy, learned standing counsel for the appellant, Sri Kishore Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the material on record. The parties hereinafter are referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal for sake of convenience in the appeal. The contentions in the grounds of appeal as well as submissions during course of hearing in nutshell are that, the award of the Tribunal is contrary to law, weight of evidence and probabilities of the case, that the Tribunal failed in not considering that there is a contributory negligence on the part of the injured by not following the traffic rules while crossing the road, that the Tribunal failed in considering that the injured boy came suddenly crossing the road in front of Maxi cab and touched the front portion of the bus and caused accident, that the Tribunal erred in arriving wrong conclusion on the huge quantum of compensation awarded without proof of actual expenditure incurred on various heads and also not believing the evidence of R.W. 1 -driver of the crime bus, the rate of interest is also excessive to reduce, hence to set aside the award of the Tribunal and to refix the compensation fixing contributory negligence of injured and reduce the compensation also there from.
(3.) WHEREAS , it is the contention of the counsel for the claimant that the findings of the Tribunal are correct and compensation awarded is just and requires no interference while sitting in appeal but for dismissal of the appeal.;