- (1.) Since both these appeals arise out of the same award dated 02.01.2013 passed by M.A.C.T./Addl. District Judge, Court No.16, Kanpur Nagar in M.A.C. No. 920 of 2010, Smt. Jyoti Yadav and four others vs. Prem Chandra Pathak and others, so they have been heard together and have been connected for hearing on admission.
(2.) The appellant of FAFO No. 735 of 2013 has filed a claim petition under sections 140 and 166 of Motor Vehicles Act for an award of Rs. 40.70 lacs on account of death of Raghvendra Singh @ Raghvendra Yadav in the incident of motor accident. It was alleged that on 13.07.2010 the deceased along with is friend Vasudev Sharma were going on foot on their side from Naramau crossing and when they reached in front of Mona Dhaba G.T. Road at about 4.30 p.m. the driver of bus UP-78AN-0546 of Bobby Tourist Bus Service driving the vehicle rashly and negligently knocked down both the pedestrians and they succumbed to the injuries at the spot. The claim was filed against the owner and insurer of the offending bus. The opposite parties contested the claim petition denying the factum of the accident. The owner of the vehicle contended that his vehicle was insured with New India Assurance Company Limited and it was being plied with valid documents and the driver had valid and effective driving license, so the insurance company is liable to indemnify the award, if any. The insurance company resisted the claim denying all the allegations in the claim petition and further stated that if the bus was not insured with them and it is being plied violating the terms and condition of the insurance then they are not liable to satisfy the award.
(3.) The Tribunal framed four issues for decision. The claimants examined Smt. Jyoti Yadav PW-1 and Ram Babu PW-2. They have filed the certified copies of FIR, charge sheet, site plan, post-mortem report and income tax returns and PAN card of the deceased as also the registration certificate and insurance company of the offending bus. The owner of the vehicle filed the photo copies of registration certificate, permit, fitness certificate, insurance policy and driving license of his driver. The insurance company did not adduce any oral and documentary evidence.;