1. The United India Insurance Company Ltd. has filed this appeal challenging the legality and correctness of the judgment and award dated 18th March 2011 passed in MVC No.1167/2008 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kundapura (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short) fastening liability on them to compensate the claimants.

2. Facts leading to the filing of this appeal are as under:

The respondents No.1 to 4 herein are the wife and children of deceased Ramakrishna Hebbar. They filed a claim petition contending that on 02-07-2008 at about 6.30 a.m., when the deceased Ramakrishna Hebbar was standing on the southern side mud portion of Udupi - Karkala Road, in front of Manipal Bakery at Manipal of Shivalli village, Udupi Taluk and District, the driver of Maruthi Omni bearing Registration No.KA-20/Z-3931 drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the said Ramakrishna Hebbar. Due to the impact, he fell down and sustained grievous injuries. Immediately after the accident, he was shifted to KMC Hospital, Manipal. However, he succumbed to the injuries on 16-07-2008. In the claim petition, it was contended that at the time of death, the deceased was aged about 60 years. He was working as a Head Cook and earning Rs.15,000/- per month. In view of death of the deceased, the claimants have lost the bread earner of the family. The accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending Maruthi Omni which was insured with the appellant - Insurance Company. Hence, both the insurer and the insured are liable to compensate the claimants to an extent of Rs.11,48,000/-

3. In response to the notice issued by the Tribunal, the owner of the Maruthi Omni remained unrepresented. The Insurance Company defended the case by filing written statement denying the entire averments made in the claim petition. They specifically contended that as on the date of accident, the driver of Maruthi Omni was not holding a valid and effective driving license to drive the same. Further, the accident had occurred due to negligence on the part of the deceased and sought for dismissal of the claim petition.

4. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed necessary issues.

5. In order to prove the case of the claimants, the 2nd claimant got himself examined as P.W.1 and one of the eye witnesses to the incident was examined as P.W.2 and got marked the documents as Ex.P1 to Ex.P79. On behalf of the respondent-Insurance Company, one of the officials was examined as R.W.1 and got marked the documents as Ex.R1 and Ex.R2.

6. The Tribunal, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence let in by the parties and taking into consideration the panchanama, copy of the complaint and police note held that due to actionable negligence on the part of driver of the Maruthi Omni, the accident had occurred. Though the Insurance Company took the defense with regard to negligence on the part of the deceased, no evidence was let in by them to prove the same. Further, though the Insurance Company took a specific contention that the driver of offending Maruthi Omni was not having valid and effective driving license as on the date of accident, subsequently the said driving license was renewed. Merely because of expiry of the period of license and omission of driver to get the license renewed, it cannot be said that there is breach of condition of the policy, for which, the Insurance Company be exonerated from its liability. The Tribunal taking notional income of the deceased as Rs.30,000/- per annum, deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses, as he was aged about 60 years applying the multiplier `9' awarded a sum of Rs.1,80,000/- towards `loss of dependency', Rs.50,000/- towards `funeral expenses/medical expenses' and Rs.15,000/- towards conventional heads. In all, a sum of Rs.2,45,000/- has been awarded with interest at 6% p.a. and the liability was fastened on the Insurance Company to compensate the claimants. The I