SHAM SUNDER,J - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the award dated 07.02.1995, rendered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Faridabad, vide which it granted compensation of Rs. 25,000/- with interest, in favour of the claimants, only under the 'No Fault Liability Clause', which was applicable, in an un-amended form, at the relevant time.
(2.) THE facts, in brief, are that on the night intervening 5/6.8.1992, Mohan Lal (now deceased) along with Jagdish, pillion rider, was riding a scooter, and was coming from the side of Faridabad to his village Pawta, and when he reached near Asha Farm, he was hit by a truck bearing registration No. HYG- 1590, which was being driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 1-driver-cum-owner thereof, from the front side. Mohan Lal sustained fatal injuries, in the said accident, and succumbed to the same. The matter was reported to Police Station, Defence Colony, New Delhi. The police of Police Station Sadar, Ballabgarh, was also informed, but no action was taken. It was further stated that the deceased was aged about 42 years, and retired as a Subedar. He was working as a Supplier of building material, in his own truck. His monthly income was about Rs. 5000/-. The claimants, being the widow, minor sons and minor daughter respectively of the deceased, filed a claim petition, claiming compensation. Respondent No. 1, the owner-cum-driver, in his written statement, stated that his truck was standing, on the un-metaled portion (Katcha portion) of the road, near Asha Farm, with parking lights on. It was further stated that the scooterist and the pillion rider, were under the influence of liquor, and riding the same, in an intoxicated condition and in a zig zag manner. On account of this, the rider of the scooter, struck the same, against his truck. It was further stated that the accident took place on account of the rash and negligent riding of the scooter, by the rider of the same. The remaining averments, were denied, being wrong.
(3.) RESPONDENT No. 2, the Insurance Company of the truck, in its written statement, pleaded that no cause of action arose to the claimants to file the petition. It was further pleaded that the claim petition was bad for non- joinder of necessary parties. It was stated that the driver of the truck was not having a valid driving licence. It was denied that the accident took place, on account of the rash or negligent driving of the truck, by respondent No. 1. It was also denied that the deceased sustained fatal injuries, in the said accident.;