JASPREET SINGH,J. - (1.) Heard Shri Mukund Tiwari learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Anil Kumar Srivastava for the respondents no.1 to 6 and Shri Pankaj Kumar Pandey for the respondents no.7 to 9.
(2.) The instant appeal has been preferred under Section 173 of the Motors Vehicle Act, 1988 assailing the award dated 27.08.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.11, Lucknow in Motor Accident Claim Case No.37 of 2003 whereby the claim petition of the respondents no.1 to 6 has been allowed awarding a sum of Rs.2,39,900/- alongwith 6% interest from the date of application till the date of its payment.
(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has urged that the tribunal has erred in returning a finding in so far as issue no.3 is concerned. In order to buttress his submission, it has been submitted that initially the claim petition was filed wherein it was stated that the offending tempo in question was being driven by Saroj Kumar @ Guddu (respondent no.7). It has further been submitted that later the respondent no.9 was impleaded and it was the stand of the respondent no.9 that he was the owner of the tempo as well as he was the person driving the same.;