(1.) The issue raised for consideration in this appeal is whether the claimants, who are the legal heirs of the deceased and who have filed the application for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter will be referred to as "Act" for convenience) and having availed an interim benefit under Section 140 of the Act, are entitled to compensation finally under Section 163(A) of the Act, that too by the Tribunal suo moto converting the application filed under Section 166 to Section 163(A) of the Act.
(2.) For deciding this legal issue, the factual matrix of the appeal, which is necessary to know, can be stated as follows : Deceased Kailas was the husband of respondent no.1, father of respondent nos.2 to 4 and son of respondent no.5. On 09/12/2003, he was proceeding as pillion rider on motorcycle, bearing no. MH30D7740, driven by respondent no.7 and owned by respondent no.8. The said motorcycle was insured with the appellant. One white colour Jeep coming from opposite direction, driven in high speed and in rash and negligent manner, gave dash to his motorcycle, thereby causing the accidental death of Kailas. The said Jeep fled away from the spot after the accident and could not be traced. F.I.R. came to be registered against the driver of the said unidentified white colour Jeep. Even police could not trace the said Jeep in the course of investigation.
(3.) At the time of accident, deceased Kailas was running the age of 30 years and on account of his untimely death, as respondents lost their only source of income, they preferred the Claim Petition No. 77/2005 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Akot, claiming the compensation from appellant and respondent nos.7 and 8 contending inter alia that respndent nos.1 to 5 have lost their only source of income and emotional support. Hence considering the age of deceased and the income, which he was earning from agriculture to the tune of Rs.120/ per day, they were entitled to get compensation of Rs.4,00,000/.