Navita Singh, J. - (1.) LEARNED counsel for the parties have been heard.
(2.) THIS appeal has been filed against the award dated 29.11.2010 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal for short), Sonepat, whereby compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,46,000/ - was awarded to the claimants (respondents No. 1 to 5) fastening the liability on the appellant. The appellant has prayed that the liability should have been of the appellant and respondent No. 8 in equal share. The case of the claimants was that on 30.1.2009 the deceased along with his wife Asha and co -brother Kishan Lal started their journey at 6.00 a.m. from Rohtak in Santro Car bearing No. HR -11B -5941 to Gurgaon. The deceased was driving the car and Kishan Lal was sitting in front with him while Asha -now respondent No. 1 was sitting behind. It was foggy at that time and when they reached in the area of village Jakhoda at about 7.00 a.m., the car touched the stationary truck from the left side as the truck was parked on the road without any indication or barricades. The number of the truck was HR -61 -5179. The deceased came out of the car to assess the damage caused when canter No. HR -55H -1040 driven in a rash and negligent manner by present respondent No. 6 came from the side of police post of village Ashoda and struck the truck, as a result of which, the deceased was sandwiched between the truck and the canter. A criminal case was got registered regarding the accident on the statement of Kishan Lal. The claimants claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 25 lacs.
(3.) RESPONDENTS No. 6 to 8 were the driver, owner and insurer respectively of the canter while respondents No. 9, 10 and the appellant were driver, owner and insurer respectively of the truck. The matter was heard ex parte against respondents No. 6, 7, 9 and 10. Respondent No. 8 pleaded that the accident took place due to the negligence of the deceased himself as well as driver of truck No. HR -61 -5179. It was totally denied that driver of the canter was at fault.;