Dr. B. Siva Sankara Rao, J.

1. The M.V.O.P Nos. 787, 789, 793, 788, 786, 794 of 2007 respectively which are impugned in these appeals are filed against the owner and insurer of van bearing No. AP 9 X 6283 as respondents 1 and 2 besides the owner and insurer of the auto bearing No. AP 23 W 0879 as respondents 3 and 4. They were allowed by separate orders respectively by the learned II Additional District 6t Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Sangareddy awarding respective compensation finding that though the auto was against the capacity of 3 + 1 carrying 9 persons besides the driver, there is no other proof to say there is negligence on the part of the driver of the auto from the F.I.R. and charge sheet filed against the driver of the van and thereby the respondents 1 and 2 i.e. owner and insurer of the van are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation claimed respectively. Having been aggrieved by the said awards impugning the same, the insurer of the van, National Insurance Company, who was the 2nd respondent to the respective claim petitions preferred the appeal by showing the injured claimant as the 1st respondent, but for MACMA No. 615 of 2011 against O.P. No