ROMI Vs. RAKESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed on behalf of the appellants under section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short 'the Act') for enhancement of sum awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gwalior, in Claim Case No. 4 of 2007, vide award dated 14.11.2008, whereby their claim regarding vehicular death of Inder Singh in the alleged road accident has been awarded for the sum of Rs. 5,85,500 along with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of filing the claim petition. The facts necessary to adjudicate this appeal in short are that the appellants-claimants filed their claim petition contending that said Inder Singh, the husband of appellant No. 1 and father of appellant Nos. 2 to 4 and 7 while the son of appellant Nos. 5 and 6, on 18.12.2006 at about 9.30 p.m. in the night while riding his motor cycle was going to Morena from village Rairu. On the way respondent No. 1 while driving the trala bearing registration No. MP 07-G 0512 in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the motor cycle of the deceased Inder Singh, resultantly, he fell down, sustained injuries and died. On lodging the report of the incident with the Police Station Purani Chhawni, same was registered against the respondent No. 1 for the offence of section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, later he was charge-sheeted for such offence. As per further averments, the deceased was running a dhaba at some village on Mumbai-Agra Highway, out of which he was earning Rs. 7,000 per month and he used to spend such income on the family members, the appellants. Due to his untimely death, the appellants have been deprived not only of his love and affection but also of their dependency. The aforesaid offending trala was registered in the name of respondent No. 2 while the same was insured with respondent No. 3. With these averments, the appellants have filed their aforesaid claim petition for the compensation of Rs. 29,08,000 along with interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum.

(2.) In the reply of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 denying the averments of the claim petition, it is stated that on the date of the incident such trala was driven by respondent No. 1 holding a valid and effective driving licence hence on holding any liability of the impugned claim on them the same be saddled against the respondent No. 3 as the same was duly insured with it.

(3.) In reply of respondent No. 3 denying the averments of the claim petition, in addition it is stated that the aforesaid offending trala was driven by respondent No. 1, contrary to the terms and conditions of the insurance policy, without having a valid and effective driving licence. With these material pleadings the prayer for dismissal of the claim petition is made.