- (1.) This appeal has been preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the judgment dated 11.2.2012 passed by the Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pali in MACT Case No. 287/2010 by which the application of the present petitioner under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act was partly allowed against petitioners no.1 and 2 and the Insurance Company has been exonerated from the liability.
(2.) The contentions of the present appellant are that the appellant is owner of the vehicle duly insured with respondent no.5-Insurance Company. Respondent no.4 is the driver of the vehicle and respondents no. 1 go 3 are the claimants in the claim petition. The learned Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition against respondent no.5 Insurance Company which is against the settled legal proposition. The negligence has been believed only on the police challan. There is no evidence that Vagta Ram, Driver of the vehicle was negligent. The whole negligence was on the part of the deceased Mathuralal himself. Further more, the learned Tribunal has not considered the fact that the vehicle was not the transport vehicle and the weight of the vehicle has not been considered. There was no requirement to have a different licence which was necessary to driver a transport vehicle. Looking to the weight of the vehicle, the driver was entitled to ply the vehicle with the licence of driving light motor vehicle. Further more, it has been stated that the learned Tribunal has awarded the compensation on higher side. There is no evidence that the age of the deceased is 50 years. Hence the appropriate multiplier should also be applied.
(3.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner on the point of admission and perused the impugned award.;