SNEH PRASHAR,J. - (1.) In the petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, "the Act of 1988") filed by appellants-claimants, they averred that on 30.09.2010 Karambir (since deceased) and Dharmender Kumar were going from Bahadurgarh towards Kaithal by means of Eicher Canter No.HR-56-6431 (for short, "the canter"). Karambir was driving the canter. When the canter reached near the drain towards Kaithal, a black bull suddenly came in front of the same. Karambir could not control the vehicle and it collided with the Safeda tree beside the road. Due to the impact, Karambir suffered grievous injuries resulting in his death after few days.
(2.) Respondent No.1, being owner and respondent No.2 being insurer of the canter were impleaded as respondents. They contested the petition. Respondent No.1 pleaded that the accident occurred arising out of use of the canter, but denied its liability to pay compensation. Respondent No.2 alleged that the story of accident presented by the appellants was concocted. It also alleged that deceased Karambir had no valid and effective driving licence on the date of accident.
(3.) On the basis of pleadings of the parties, issues were settled. Both the parties adduced evidence in discharge of the onus on them. Considering the ocular and documentary evidence led by the parties and the submission made on their behalf, learned Tribunal dismissed the claim petition.;