NIRMAL RANI Vs. LAKHWINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Court of learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hoshiarpur vide Award dtd. 11/1/2012 had disposed off and allowed the claim petition under Sec. 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short, 'the Act') of Nirmal Rani and allowed compensation to her to the tune of ^ 1,84,800/- along with interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of petition till realization of the amount. Aggrieved over these findings, the widowed mother who claims herself to be aged around 56 years had through this invocation sought enhancement of the compensation for the unfortunate death of her unmarried son Baldev Raj then aged around 29 years.Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records of the case. The contentions of the claimant mother, present appellant, that the deceased was working as a Medical Representative earning ? 8,400/- per month and had died in a motor vehicular accident when his Scooter bearing registration No.PB07J-4892 (for short, 'the ill fated scooter') was struck by the offending truck bearing registration No.HR38E-7463 while being driven in rash and negligent manner.

(2.) In the pleadings, the driver and owner respondents No.l and 2 have admitted the incident while the insurance company respondent No.3 denied for want of knowledge but claimed that the offending vehicle was not having a valid route permit nor the driver was having a valid and effective driving license. The Tribunal framed the following issues:-

(3.) The claimant examined herself as AW1 and sought corroboration from Naresh Kumar AW2 and Rahul Jaswal AW3 and closed the evidence. Respondents No.l and 2 did not lead any evidence. However, respondent No.3 tendered copy of insurance policy Ex.RY and closed the evidence. That is how the present matter is before this Court.