JUDGMENT 1. - Having heard Mr. Kala for the appellant and Mr. Bhandari for the respondents, I am of the opinion that no interference is called for in this appeal. 2. Mr. Kala submitted that the appellants truck was not "involved in this accident and his liability has been wrongly fastened. While discussing issue No. 1, the Tribunal has taken into consideration the evidence of P.W. 2 Kistura Ram, P.W. 3 Ganpatlal, eye witnesses. P.W. 2 was on duty and he has stated that he was guarding the truck and there was a lantern, a signal to stop but the truck of the appellant, inspite of that drove on Shakoor, who was sleeping on Charpai and this happened on account of the negligence on appellant who was driving the vehicle. P.W. 3 Ganpatlal, who was Khalasi, has also corroborated it. 3. There is no reliable evidence to rebut it and to show that any other truck was involved in his accident and the appellant has been wrongly fastened. 4. Consequently, the above finding cannot be disturbed. So far as the compensation is concerned obviously it is not only not excessive but quite inadequate. However no cross objection has been filed and, therefore, the appeal fails and is dismissed, without any order as to costs.Appeal dismissed. *******