R.L.Anand, J. - (1.) This judgment disposes of F.A.O. No. 971 of 1993 titled United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Surjit Singh Sodhi and cross-objections No. 55-CII of 1999 filed by the claimants in the main appeal itself as both the appeal and the cross-objections have arisen from the award dated 27.2.1993 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Patiala, which awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,92,000 to the claimant/respondent Nos. 3 to 6 along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of the order till actual realisation. The crossobjections are to the effect that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and that the interest should be awarded by the Tribunal from the date of the filing of the claim petition and not from the date of order.
(2.) The brief facts of the case are that claimants Sukhdev Kaur, Kiranjit Kaur, Gurbant Singh and Gurnam Kaur filed claim petition under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act against Surjit Singh Sodhi (owner of the truck), Chand Singh (driver of the truck) and United India Insurance Co. Ltd. (insurer of the truck) and claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 15,00,000 and the case set up by the claimants was that on 26.4.1989, Uggar Singh Sidhu, who was working as Agriculture Sub-Inspector at Civil Veterinary Hospital, Patiala, located on Jail Road, Patiala, was coming on his bicycle from Cattle Breeding Farming for his home and when he just reached the road at about 4.45 p.m., a truck bearing registration No. CHW 3713 driven by respondent No. 3 Chand Singh came from the jail side and knocked down Uggar Singh with the cycle, as a result of which he fell on the road and received serious injuries on his person. The accident was witnessed by Jagpal Singh, son of Darshan Singh and Sub-Inspector Ujaggar Singh, who were following the deceased on their respective bicycles. Uggar Singh was removed to the hospital at Patiala where he expired on 27.4.1989 after admission. The accident, according to the claimants, had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the truck by respondent Chand Singh. The deceased was born on 2.3.1950.
(3.) The claim petition was contested by the respondents. Respondent No. 1 (in the claim petition), who was the owner of the truck, denied the accident. However, he admitted that the truck in question was insured with the United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and the insurance was w.e.f. 22.8.1988 to 21.8.1989. The truck was comprehensively insured. The driver of the truck also denied the accident, but at the same time pleaded that the accident was the result of negligence on the part of the deceased and the witnesses relied upon by the claimants are procured one. The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. admitted that the truck in question was insured with it but it was contended that at the time of accident the driver of the truck was not holding a valid driving licence.;