Manak Mohta, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 3.8.1994 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dungarpur in MACT Case No. 54 of 1989 whereby; the learned Judge has allowed the claim petition in favour of claimants while holding the responsibility of non-claimant-appellant for the payment of compensation jointly and severally with the owner of the vehicle and has awarded a total compensation of Rs. 1,10,000/- plus interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition.
(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the claim petition are that on 23.11.1988, at about 4.30 p.m., deceased Gulab was going to his house while sitting in the Truck No. RJJ 3209. It was further alleged that the deceased Gulab, after paying the fare to the truck driver, sat in the said Truck along with other persons. The truck was being driven by Veer Mal rashly and negligently at high speed on the turn of Mandav Mines, and due to that Gulab sprang out from the truck ,got insured and he became unconscious. He was brought to Government Hospital, Sagwara, where he was declared dead. An FIR No.170/88 at P.S. Ganeshpur was registered under Section 304-A, IPC of the incident. After investigation a charge sheet was filed against the driver of the said truck Veer Mal for rash and negligent driving the vehicle and causing death in accident in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dungarpur, which was registered as Cr. Case No.553/88. The legal representatives of the deceased Gulab filed an application for compensation under Section 110(A) of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. The claimants claimed a sum of Rs.2,54,000/- as compensation on different heads. It was stated in the claim petition that the deceased was engaged in masonry work and he used to earn Rs. 30/- per day. He was 30 years old at the time of accident. The claimants are widow, minor son, daughters and mother of the deceased. It was stated that they were fully dependent on his income and due to his untimely death in accident, they suffered hardships and monetary loss as well as loss love and affection and loss of guardianship to minor children. They prayed for awarding of compensation as demanded. The said vehicle was said to be owned by the non-claimant No.2 and was insured with the appellant- Insurance Company.
(3.) Non-claimants No.1 and 2 remained absent throughout the trial and they did not file their reply to the claim petition.;