(1.) THE abovementioned three appeals arise out of the same motor accident, parties to the proceedings are same and similar questions are involved for determination in these appeals, therefore, these appeals are being decided by this common judgment for convenience. It may be mentioned that in these cases the injured and the deceased persons belonged to one and same family i.e. Smt. Sulochana Negi is the injured, while deceased Yadubeer Singh was her husband and deceased Km. Deepa was her daughter. All these persons were travelling by the same bus on the fateful day, which resulted in the death of two persons and injuries to Smt. Sulochana Negi along with other persons.
(2.) THESE appeals have been preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, (in short the Act) against the judgment and Award dated 11th March, 1991 passed in M.A.C. Petition No. 17 of 1989, M.A.C. Petition No. 15 of 1989 and M.A.C. No. 16 of 1988 by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/District Judge, Chamoli (in short the Tribunal). In Claim Petition No. 17 of 1989, the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 60,000 in favour of the injured claimant Smt. Sulochana Negi, while in Claim Petition No. 15 of 1989, the claimants were awarded compensation of Rs. 1,44,000 for the death of deceased Yadubeer Singh and in Claim Petition No. 16 of 1989, compensation worth Rs. 25,000 was awarded to the claimants for the death of Km. Deepa. In addition, interest @ 12% per annum was also awarded from the date of order till payment. Aggrieved the Insurance Company-appellant has come up in appeal.
(3.) THE opposite parties contested the claim petition by filing their written statement and denied the allegations made in the claim petition for want of knowledge. The owner of the vehicle Budhi Ballabh Joshi in his written statement asserted that the accident occurred due to mechanical failure of the vehicle and there was no negligence on the part of the driver or owner. The driver of the ill-fated bus had taken the same stand as that of the owner.