( 1 ) BEING aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 13th June 1989 passed in M. V. C. No. 882/87 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Nos. III and II Additional District Judge, Belgaum, this appeal has been filed claiming enhanced compensation for the death of Bahubali Tavanappa Gouranna, in an accident that occurred on 21st October 1987.

( 2 ) THE brief facts are:deceased was waiting for conveyance to come to Belgaum on the extreme eastern side of the Poona-Bangalore road near Hebbal cross on 21st October 1987. A tanker bearing No. MWU 3685 driven by respondent No. 1 in a rash and negligent manner came from opposite side and dashed against the deceased with great speed. Deceased died on the spot due to the said impact. F. I. R. No. 156/87 was registered. Post mortem was got done by Sankeshwar Police in the course of their investigation. The dead body was handed over to the wife and the mother of the deceased, appellants 1 and 2 respectively. It is averred in the claim application that the deceased was 23 years of age at the time of his death. He was hale, hearty and well built. He was the only male member of the family. He was earning Rs. 1,200/- per month by doing attendant's work in the State Bank of Mysore, Vadagaon, Branch. The wife, appellant No. 1, was 19 years of age at the time of the death of the deceased. Total compensation claimed was Rs. 5,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of filing of the application for compensation till its realisation.

( 3 ) THE driver, owner and the insurer of the tanker were arrayed as respondents 1 to 3 respectively. Driver and the owner of the vehicle remained absent in spite of service and were proceeded ex parte before the Tribunal.

( 4 ) INSURANCE Company filed its objections and denied the averments of the appellants regarding the age, income, status of the deceased and the manner of accident. It was averred that appellants 1 and 2 were not dependant upon the income of the deceased and that the compensation claimed was excessive. It was also averred that without prejudice to the objections raised above, the insurance company was not liable to pay compensation, as the driver of the vehicle did not possess a valid licence on the date of the accident.

( 5 ) ON the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed:1. Whether the petitioners prove that Bahubali Gouranna died due to injuries sustained in the accident that occurred on 21-10-1987 near Hebbal Cross on P. B. Road at about 13-30 hours due to the rash and negligent driving of the tanker bearing No. MWU 3685 by R-1?2. Whether the petitioners prove that they were dependent upon the income of the deceased?3. Whether R-3 proves that R-1 was not holding a valid driving licence on the date of accident?4. Whether R-3 proves that R-2 has committed breach of conditions of policy and hence, it is not liable to pay the compensation?5. What is the quantum of compensation to which the petitioners are entitled?6. What Order?

( 6 ) UNDER issue No. 1 on the basis of the evidence produced before the Tribunal it was held that accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the tanker bearing No. MWU 3685. Issue No. 2 was answered in the affirmative and it was held that appellants were dependant upon the income of the deceased. Issue Nos. 3 and 4 were answered in the negative. It was held that respondent No. 1 was holding a valid driving licence and on the date of the accident. It was also held that owner of the vehicle did not commit a breach of condition of policy. Under Issue No. 5 a total compensation of Rs. 25,800/-along with interest was ordered to be paid to appellants 1 and 2 jointly out of which appellant No. 1 wife was held entitled to Rs. 17,300/- where as appellant No. 2 mother was held entitled to compensation of Rs. 8,500/ -.

( 7 ) IT was held that the deceased was drawing a sum of Rs. 1182. 30ps by way of salary. In place of the deceased after one year of his death his wi