SUNIL KUMAR SINHA,J. - (1.)THESE appeals have been directed against the award dated 28.08.2004 passed by The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur in Claim Case No. 14/2003 M.A. No. 1222/2004 has been filed by the Insurance Company challenging its liability, where as M.A. No. 13/2006 has been filed by the Claimants for enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal. The claimants are the unfortunate parents and sister of the deceased Heera Bai, who died in the motor accident on 30.4.2003.
(2.)OH her death, the claimants filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 pleading that on 30.4.2003, when the deceased was traveling as a labour (Reja) in Tata-709 vehicle bearing registration No. MH-31-W-3889, the said vehicle met with an accident on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver resulting into her death. They pleaded that the deceased was earning RS. 80/- per day on account of her labour and she was also earning Rs. 1000/ - per month by stitching clothes, therefore, they should be given compensation in sum of Rs. 8,70,000/- along with interest. To support their claim, they further pleaded that after the accident, a First Information Report was also lodged in concern police station, on which, a crime was registered against the driver under Section 279, 337, 338 and 304 (A) I.P.C. and the dead body of the deceased was sent for post-mortem examination and the vehicle etc. were also seized.
The driver remained ex-parte before the Tribunal.

(3.)THE owner filed his written statement denying the contention about rash and negligent driving of the vehicle by the driver. He also denied the income of the deceased Heera Bai as Rs. 80/- per day and pleaded that whenever he required, he used to take Heera Bai with his vehicle and on that days he used to pay her Rs. 60/- per day. He further pleaded that his vehicle was insured with the said insurer and in view of the vehicle being insured no liability can be fastened on him. The Insurance Company also filed its written statement and denied the contents of the claim petition. It took specific plea that the said vehicle was registered and insured as a goods vehicle, whereas, the deceased and other persons were traveling as the passengers in the said vehicle, therefore, the Insurance Company would not be responsible to pay compensation to the claimants.
;