LAWS(MPH)-2004-5-16

PUSHPA BAI Vs. KESHARIMAL

Decided On May 08, 2004
PUSHPA BAI Appellant
V/S
KESHARIMAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CLAIMANTS are not satisfied with the award of Rs. 50,000/-, passed in their favour by the Tribunal. It is dated 5-2-2000, passed in Claim Case No. 147 of 1999 by learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dewas. They want more and hence, they have filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor vehicles Act against the aforementioned impugned award. So the short question that arises for consideration in this appeal is, whether any case for enhancement in the impugned award, i. e. , for Rs. 50,000/-, passed in claimants favour is made out on facts found and brought on record.

(2.) NONE for the appellants. Heard Shri A. Goyal, learned Counsel for respondent No. 3.

(3.) FACTS are not in dispute. On 31-7-1997, Durga Prasad, aged 35 years met with an accident when he was sitting in one tractor-trolley belonging to N. A. No. 2 (respondent No. 2) bearing No. MP-13-KA-2662-2663. This tractor-trolley was owned driven by N. A. No. 1 (respondent No. 1) and as stated supra owned by N. A. No. 2 (respondent No. 3 ). It is also the case of claimants who are the legal representative of Durga Prasad that he (Durga prasad) was in the employment of N. A. No. 2 (respondent No. 2 ). It is also alleged that tractor-trolley in question was insured with the N. A. No. 3 (respondent No. 3) at the relevant time. Due to accident, Durga Prasad died giving rise to filing of the claim petition by the claimants, out of which this appeal arises, claiming compensation for the death of Durga Prasad. So far as n. A. No. 1 and N. A. No. 2 are concerned they did not contest the claim and remained ex parte. Whereas Insurance Company (N. A. No. 3) alone contested. Claimants led evidence, i. e. , wife of claimant (P. W. 1 ). In the opinion of tribunal, the claimants were held entitled to claim a sum of Rs. 50,000/ -. It is against this award or we may say determination, the claimants have come up in appeal.