JUDGMENT :

C.M. JOSHI, J.

1. Aggrieved by the judgment and award passed in MVC No. 176/2012 on 18th August 2014 by the learned XVI Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes and Member, MACT, Bangalore City, SCCH 14, the appellants/ petitioners have approached this Court in appeal, assailing the quantum of the compensation.

By the impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 4,02,000/- after deducting 20% towards contributory negligence on the part of the deceased, together with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition till realization.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their ranks before the Tribunal.

3. The brief facts of the case are as below:

The petitioners filed a claim petition under Section 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation of Rs. 20,00,000/- on account of the death of one Sudhakar in a road traffic accident that occurred on 10-07-2011 at 1.30 p.m. It was contended by the petitioners that, they were the grandmother, sister and brother of the deceased Sudhakar and he was riding a motorcycle bearing No. KA-02-EQ-6051 on the National Highway No. 7, Hosur- Bengaluru main road in front of Balegarana Halli Gate, Athibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk, along with the pillion rider Nagesh. When they were crossing the road, a car bearing No. TN-74-P-7234 came at high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle of the deceased and as a result, Sudhakar sustained injuries to his head and legs and he was taken to Sparsh hospital, Hosur Road, Bangalore, wherein he took treatment and thereafter, he died on 22-7-2011 while shifting to Live 100 hospital Bangalore on account of the injuries sustained in the accident and petitioners have spent more than Rs. 2,00,000/- towards transportation of the body and funeral expenses.

It was contended that prior to the accident, deceased Sudhakar was working as a loader and un-loader and doing the coolie work and earning Rs. 8,000/- per month. Due to the sudden death of the deceased, the petitioners have lost love and affection and their livelihood as they lost the only earning member of the family. Subsequent to the accident, the police have registered a case against the driver of the car in Crime No. 173/2011 for the offences punishable under Section 279, 338 and 304 (A) of IPC. It is contended that the respondents being the owner and insurer of the offending vehicle are liable to pay the compensation of Rs. 20,00,000/-.

4. In pursuant to the notice issued by the Tribunal, respondents have appeared before the Tribunal through their counsel and filed objection statement.

5. Respondent No. 1, owner of the vehicle admitted that the police have registered a case against the driver and he was RC holder of the car bearing No. TN-74-D-7234 and the driver of the car was having a valid driving license at the time of the accident. It was contended that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the Two wheeler i.e. the deceased and that his vehicle was insured with respondent No. 2-insurance company and therefore, he has sought for dismissal of the petition with costs.

6. Respondent No. 2-insurance company admitted that it had issued a policy in respect of the car owned by respondent No. 1 and it is not aware of the relationship of the petitioners with the deceased. It was contended that respondent No. 1 and the concerned police have failed to forward the documents and therefore, respondent No. 2 is not liable to indemnify respondent No. 1. It was further contended that the driver of the car was not having a valid and effective driving license at the time of the accident and also that the accident was due to the negligence of the deceased and as such, alleging that the compensation claimed is highly exaggerated baseless and imaginary, sought for dismissal of the petition with costs.

7. On the basis of the abov