( 1 ) THIS is claimants appeal for enhancement of compensation under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award dated 26-7-2001 passed by Special Judge and Additional motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior in claim Case No. 1/2000.

( 2 ) BRIEF facts of the case are that deceased pannalal, aged about 26 years, who was a healthy man, was working as a driver on ambassador Car No. MP07-W-1067 owned by one Ravindra Kumar. On 26-2-1999 deceased Pannalal was coming to Gwalior from district Kakroli and he was driving the said car at his own side. The moment the car reached near Police Station Charbhuja, one truck No. RJ27/g-1673, which was being driven by respondent No. 1 rashly and negligently, dashed the Ambassador Car. As a result of this accident Pannalal died on spot. The matter was reported to Police Station charbhuja, crime was registered and after investigation charge-sheet was filed.

( 3 ) APPELLANTS those who are widow, three sons and one daughter of the deceased, have filed claim petition under Section 163 of the motor Vehicles Act, in which it was contended that deceased was working as driver, getting salary of Rs. 2000/- per month and daily allowance (Bhatta) at the rate of Rs. 50/- per day, as such he was getting total salary of Rs. 3500/- per month; they were all dependent on the income of the deceased and claimed compensation of Rs. 20. 00 lacs. It was further pleaded that the accident took place because of rash and negligent driving of the aforesaid truck and appellant No. 1 smt. Shakuntala, who is the wife of the deceased, became widow in young age.

( 4 ) DURING trial the respondents No. 1 and 2 driver and owner of the said truck, were absent and they were ex parte. Respondent no. 3 Insurance company filed written statement and denied the allegation that the salary of the deceased was Rs. 3500/- per month including the Bhatta (daily allowance ). It was further stated that the accident took place because of negligence of the driver of the Ambassador car and the truck driver was not having valid driving licence and he was driving the vehicle without licence, therefore, insurance company is not liable for compensation as the truck was being driven contrary to the terms and conditions of the policy, and therefore, prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.

( 5 ) DURING trial the issue were framed and evidence of the parties was recorded. The tribunal recorded a finding that the accident took place because of rash and negligent driving by the truck driver. It dashed the ambassador car and as a result of injuries sustained by driver of the car he died on spot. The Tribunal further found that there is no evidence that the accident took place because of rash and negligent driving of the drivers of both the vehicles. There is also no evidence on record that the truck driver was driving the truck contrary to the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. The claimants have not produced any documentary evidence on record about salary and bhatta. Therefore, Tribunal held that in the absence of any documentary proof about the salary of Rs. 2000/- plus daily allowance of rs. 50/- per day, the salary of the deceased-driver of the Ambassador car cannot be considered as Rs. 3500/- per month but held that he was earning Rs. 1000/- per month, and considered total income of the deceased including allowance as Rs. 15,000/- per annum as per second schedule and assessed the dependency of Rs. 10,000/- per annum. The age of the deceased was considered as 26 years as per post-mortem report and it was found that he was between the age group of 25-30 and for the aforesaid age group applied the multiplier of 18 and awarded total compensation of Rs. 1,80,000/ -. The Tribunal further awarded a sum of Rs. 8000/- in the head of loss of consortium, love and affection, Rs. 2000/-for funeral expenses and Rs. 5000/- for loss of consortium to the wife of the deceased and thus awarded total amount of compensatio