JUDGMENT :

Bellunke A.S. J. - Though this appeal is listed for admission with the consent of learned counsel on both sides, it is heard finally.

2. The appellants were the claimants in M.V.C.No.475/2006 before the III Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) & CJM, Dharwad (herein after referred to as 'the Tribunal', for the sake of convenience). By judgment and award dated 04.06.2009, the Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.1,10,000/- to the claimants by directing respondent Nos.1 and 2 to jointly and severally satisfy the award. Not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimants have preferred this appeal.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to in terms of their status before the Tribunal.

4. Briefly stated the facts are that, on 29.11.2005 one Sri Sanganabasava S/o Basavaraj @ Basavanneppa Matti was travelling in an Indigo car from Gadag to Dharwad cautiously. When the car was approaching Hubli Railway Gate, Truck bearing registration No.KA-25/B-2788 driven by its driver in a high speed and rash and negligent manner dashed to the Indigo Car which was being driven by Sri Sanganabasava. On account of the said accident, Sanganabasava who was the inmate of the Car sustained grievous injuries and he was shifted to the Hospital. Ultimately the injured succumbed to the injuries sustained in the said accident. At the time of accident the deceased Sanganabasava was a pensioner, aged about 64 years and drawing pension of an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month. He was also earning more than Rs.1,00,000/- per annum out of agriculture. Petitioners are the Class-I legal heirs of the deceased, as petitioner No.1 is the wife, petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are the daughter and son of the deceased respectively who filed the claim petition seeking compensation on account of death of husband of the first petitioner and father of the second and third petitioners.

5. In response to the service of notice by the Tribunal, respondent No.2 appeared through its counsel and resisted the claim petition.

6. On the basis of the rival pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues for its consideration :

"1. Whether the petitioners prove that the accident has taken place on 29.11.2005 at about 15.30 hours, was due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Truck bearing No.KA.25/B-2788, in the accident the deceased sustained injuries and died? 2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, what amount and from whom?

3. What Order or Award?"

7. In support of their case, petitioner No.2 examined herself as PW.1 and produced thirteen documents which were marked as Exs.P.1 to P.13, while the copy of Pension particulars was marked as Ex.R.1.

8. On the basis of the evidence on record, the Tribunal answered Issue No.1 in the affirmative and awarded compensation of Rs.1,10,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit. Not being satisfied with the award, the claimants have preferred this appeal.

9. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondent insurance company and perused the material available on record.

10. The grievance of the appellants is that the Tribunal held that petitioner No.1 was not dependent as she is a pensioner, getting pension of Rs.14,000/- to Rs.15,000/- per month. As on the date of accident, petitioner Nos.2 and 3 were depending on the income of their father, but the Tribunal has denied compensation on the ground that the petitioner No.2 is married daughter and petitioner No.3 is not dependent on his father's income.

11. Therefore, what the deceased would have earned during his life time would be the loss of income on account of his death and it is to be paid to his legal heirs. Petitioner No.2 was employed as on the date of evidence but not on the date of death of her father. It is not th