- (1.) By this judgment shall stand disposed off the above two matters. One by way of appeal preferred by the claimants and other the cross-objections on behalf of driver and owner of the offending vehicle. Since both being conjoint having arisen out of the same very award dated 28th May, 2011 of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rohtak are, thus, taken up together.
(2.) Before venturing into the relative merits, it is essential to picturise the factual situation culminating into this petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. It was on 5th October, 2009 at about 9.30 a.m. Rajrati Devi Sharma also referred to as Rajrati Devi was going on foot to fetch cattle fodder, when on her way to fields, Neeraj Sharma met her and offered her a lift. It is alleged that due to rash and negligent driving of this respondent going over a hump on the road, the deceased fell down, leading to her death, regarding which a criminal case too was got registered.
(3.) The family claim that deceased was aged around 46 years and earning Rs. 10,000/- per month from her agricultural pursuits, upon which claimants husband, Anand Parkash, Preeti, Monika, Himanshi daughters and Hari Om son were dependent. Learned Tribunal took the notional income of the deceased and granted total compensation of Rs. 4,88,000/- holding the respondents driverNeeraj Sharma and owner Shashi Kant Bhardwaj to be responsible for this payment, whereas, Insurance Company stood exonerated. That is how, the parties are before this Court.;