In appeals concerning compensation claims, parties seeking enhancement must file cross-objections; failure to do so limits the appellate court's scope for adjustment.

1. Challenge in this motor accident civil miscellaneous appeal is to the order dated 31.12.2015 in MVOP No. 297 of 2014 on the file of Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - cum - IV Additional District Judge, Kadapa (for short 'the Tribunal') whereunder the Tribunal, while dealing with the claim of compensation for Rs.18,75,000 sought by the claimants with regard to the death of Pasala Anjan Kumar Reddy alias Kumar Reddy (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased'), in a motor vehicle accident, which occurred on 6.7.2013, awarded a sum of Rs.18,75,000 towards compensation.

2. The second respondent / insurer, aggrieved by the aforesaid order, filed the present appeal.

3. The parties to this appeal will hereinafter be referred to as described before the Tribunal, for the sake of convenience.

4. Appellant herein is National Insurance Co. Ltd., which was shown as second respondent in the aforesaid MVOP No. 297 of 2014.

5. The case of the claimants, in brief, according to the averments set out in the claim before the Tribunal, is that on 6.7.2013, the deceased, his younger brother, and one Khaleel went to in - laws village i.e., Yellampalli of Mydukur Mandal. During return journey, the deceased alone was coming on his motor cycle. He was coming ahead of his younger brother and Khaleel, who were travelling on another motor cycle. When they reached near K.M.C. Camp Office situated at Dumpalagattu on Kadapa - Kurnool main road, then the first respondent's tipper bearing No. AP - 22 - W - 3161, came from opposite direction, being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and at high speed on wrong side and dashed against the motorbike of the deceased. Then, the deceased fell down from the motor cycle, sustained grievous injuries and died instantaneously. The accident was witnessed by his younger brother. He lodged a report before Khajipeta Police Station, which was registered as a case in Crime No. 130 of 2013 for the offence under S.304 - A, IPC against the driver of the tipper and later police laid a charge - sheet. The deceased was aged 25 years as on the date of accident. He was hale and hearty prior to the accident. He was running a tractor bearing No. AP - 04 - N - 3683 and trailer bearing No. AP - 04 - W - 1951, which stood in his name. He had a valid driving licence to drive a light motor vehicle and tractor - trailer. The tractor and trailer were registered for commercial use. Deceased used to take his tractor and trailer for hire regularly. The village of the deceased is situated near Chennur Mandal Head Quarters, which is very near to Kadapa City. The deceased was earning not less than Rs.30,000 per month and contributing his earnings for the maintenance of the petitioners. On account of sudden death of the deceased, they lost their livelihood. Deceased purchased the tractor and trailer with the financial assistance of Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd., Kadapa. He was regularly paying Rs.8,250 per month towards its loan installment. The first petitioner lost consortium at her young age and minor child also lost her love and affection. First respondent is the owner of the offending vehicle and the second respondent is its insurer. Hence, both the respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the petitioners.

6. First respondent remained ex parte.

7. Second respondent got filed a written statement denying the case of the claimants. It is his contention that the claimants have to prove the age, avocation and earnings of the deceased and the manner of the accident. The deceased drove his motor cycle in a ras