SHABNAM KAUSAR BANO Vs. T. AGRAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants-claimants have challenged the impugned award dated 10-05-2013 passed by Sixth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Durg, C.G. in Claim Case No. 42/2013, wherein learned Claims Tribunal allowed the claim application in part and awarded a total sum of Rs. 8,71,250/- as compensation in a death case along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of claim application till its realization after deducting 50% of the amount towards contributory negligence.

(2.) Facts of the case relevant for disposal of this appeal are that on 11-02-2011 when Mohammad Riyaju (now deceased) was traveling on his motor cycle bearing registration No. CG.07.F.3329 and going towards Jama Masjid, Durg. When he was going across the Railway over-bridge of Dhamdha, at that relevant time, one Truck (boring machine truck) bearing registration No. KA.07 8727 (hereinafter referred to as "offending truck") driven by respondent No. 1/ non-applicant No. 1 dashed the motor cycle of deceased due to which, he suffered grievous injuries over his person and succumbed to those accidental injuries. The accident was reported to concerned police station, based on which crime bearing No. 92/11 was registered against respondent No. 1/ non-applicant No. 1 for offences punishable under Section 304A of IPC. Appellants-claimants who are widow and children of the deceased filed claim application before the competent Claims Tribunal claiming Rs. 94,00,000/- as total compensation on the ground that on the date of accident, the deceased was doing business of sale of vegetable and other business and thereby earning Rs. 3,00,000/- per annum and after the death of Mohammad Riyaju, they were dependent on the income of the deceased.

(3.) Non-Applicant No. 1 & 2/ respondent No. 1 & 2 submitted their reply to the claim application and denied all the adverse pleadings made in the claim application and pleaded that the report has been lodged by mentioning wrong number of the vehicle, they have been falsely implicated in the criminal case and no accident as pleaded in the claim application took place from the offending truck, in addition to that, they have also pleaded that on the date of accident offending truck was insured with respondent No. 3/ non-applicant No. 3-Insurance Company and if any amount of compensation is awarded to the claimants then the liability will be upon respondent No. 3/ non-applicant No. 3-Insurance Company.