B. Manohar, J.

M/s. Shriram General Insurance Company as well as the claimants have preferred these appeals, challenging the judgment and award dated 6th April, 2016 made in M.V.C. Nos.383 and 384 of 2015 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short).

2. M/s. Shriram General Insurance Company being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal fastening liability on them to compensate the claimants has filed M.F.A.Nos.4577 and 4578 of 2016. Whereas, the claimants in M.V.C.No.384/2015 being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal had filed M.F.A.No. 4774/2016, seeking enhancement of the compensation. Hence, all the appeals are clubbed together and disposed of by this common judgment.

3. The parties are referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal for convenience.

4. The respondent Nos.1 to 4 in M.F.A. No.4577 of 2016 and 1st respondent in M.F.A.No.4748 of 2016 filed the claim petitions contending that on 10-7-2014, at about 11.15 a.m., the claimant in M.V.C.No.383/2015 along with deceased Ramanjineyulu, was proceeding in a Car bearing Registration No.KA-51/MB-277 towards Ananthapur in Andhra Pradesh, when they reached near Kanaganapalli village, on Kanaganapalli-Mamillapalli, while the Car was passing through a blind curve, all of a sudden, the driver of Eicher vehicle bearing Reg.No.AP-02/U-8114 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the front side of the said Car. In order to avoid the heavy impact, driver of the said Car, took the vehicle to the left side, and dashed against the road side rock, as a result of which, the driver lost control and the vehicle got turned turtle to the right side. Due to the said accident, the inmate of the car Ramanjineyulu and the driver of the said car sustained grievous injuries. Immediately after the accident, the injured persons were taken to Kranthi Super Speciality Hospital, Ananthpur. After the first aid treatment, the claimant in M.V.C. No.383/2015 was shifted to BGS Hospital. He had spent more than Rs. 1,00,000/- towards hospitalization and medical expenses. He is an Advocate by Profession and earning Rs. 1,50,000/- per month. Due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of Eicher vehicle, the accident occurred and sought for compensation of Rs. 8.00 Lakhs. However, Ramanjineyulu succumbed to the injuries while he was taking treatment in the hospital. Post-mortem was conducted at Victoria Hospital and thereafter, his body was shifted to his native place at Balasamudram Village. The legal representatives of Rama-njineyulu in their claim petition have contended that at the time of death, deceased was aged about 52 years. He was a progressive agriculturist and was also giving technical advise to the farmers and earning three to four thousand rupees per month. He owns more than 55 acres of agricultural land. By using drip irrigation, he was rising different varieties of commercial crops in an extent of 40 acres of land and earning two lakhs rupees per month. In addition to that, he was rearing hybrid cows and earning five thousand rupees by doing milk vending business. In view of his death, the family has lost their bread earner. Therefore, they sought for compensation of Rs. 77.00 lakhs.

5. In response to the notice issued by the Tribunal in both the cases, the first respondent who is the owner of the offending vehicle filed the written statement denying the entire averments made in the claim petitions and contended that, she is the owner of Eicher vehicle and one R.V. Vijayakumar was the driver of the said vehicle and he had valid and effective driving license as on the date of accident. The compensation claimed is excessive and exorbitant. The Insurance Policy was in force as on the date of accident. Hence, the Insurance Company is liable to compensate the claimants. Therefore, sought for dismissal of the claim petition as against the first respondent.

6. Insuranc