(1.) THE appellant--Insurance Company--has challenged the award of Rs. 1,00,000/- plus costs of Rs. 3,000/- and interest at 12% on Rs. 1 lakh passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, South Goa, Margao in Claim Petition No. 78 of 1986 on the ground that this is a case where the deceased was a gratuitous passenger on the goods vehicle; that there was collusion between the owner and driver prejudicial to the interest of the Insurance Company and if these facts are taken into consideration, the Insurance Company can not be made liable for such award. Apart from this, it is also contended that the quantum of compensation is pretty high, looking to the fact that the deceased was merely a labourer of 18 years of age. For these reasons, it is prayed by the appellant--Insurance Company--that so far as the liability foisted on the Insurance Company is there, the same should be set aside.
(2.) THIS has been countered on behalf of the respondents - claimants and also the owner and driver and it is contended that a very clear written statement has been filed on record to show that the deceased was a labourer on the truck belonging to the owner and he was, therefore, fully covered under the policy of the insurance.
(3.) THE claimants have preferred a claim for Rs. 1,50,000/-. On the question of negligence, there is evidence of (Cl.W. 2) Bassappa Irappa, who had deposed that when the offending truck was proceeding along Bali Canacona side, the deceased was attempting to get down. The driver of the vehicle had slowed down the speed but instead of bringing it to a halt, he picked up the speed before the deceased could get down. In that process, the deceased fell down and came under the wheels of the truck. These facts do not appear to be much in dispute and it can be easily held that the driver of the vehicle was negligent and accordingly, was answerable for the compensation.