K.K. SONAWANE, J.

1. Heard. Admit. Matter is taken up for final hearing on merit with consent of both the parties.

2. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation amount determined by the MACT, Beed vide judgment and award dated 19-3-2015, in MACP No. 91 of 2010, the appellants-original claimants, taking recourse of remedy under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short “the Act, 1988), preferred the present appeal for redressal. It has been alleged that the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal is meagre, unjust and unreasonable one. Therefore, claimants claimed enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in this appeal.

3. The genesis of the appeal culled out in brief is that, the deceased Vinod s/o Parmeshwar Maske, 20 years old, was the milk-man and agriculturist resident of Gawaliwadi, Tal. and Dist. Beed. The claimants are his legal representatives, being parents. On the ill-fated day of incident, i.e. on 28-2-2010, deceased Vinod started proceeding towards Palwan village dairy on his bicycle for delivery of milk. But, it had something different in store for him. Suddenly, the vehicle – ST bus bearing Registration No. MH-12/AV 9420, arrived speedily from the backside and gave dash to the bicycle of deceased Vinod. The driver of the ST bus was very negligent and rash while driving the vehicle. He did not pay any heed to the traffic conditions on the road, resulting into occurrence of alleged vehicular accident. The deceased Vinod received fatal injuries and died instantaneously on the spot itself. The information about the incident was passed on to Police Station Beed (Rural). The police personnel rushed to the spot and drawn panchanama of scene of occurrence. The dead body of deceased Vinod was escorted to the Government Hospital, Beed. After inquest panchanama, the Medical Experts conducted post mortem on the mortal remains of deceased Vinod. The concerned Medical Officer opined that deceased Vinod succumbed to fracture injuries to his skull. The police registered crime No. 24 of 2010 under section 304A and 279 of Indian Penal Code against the driver of the vehicle ST Bus involved in the accident. The parents of deceased Vinod blamed the driver of the ST Bus for untimely death of their son Vinod. Thereafter, the appellants/claimants by invoking remedy under section 166 of the Act, 1988, filed the application for compensation of Rs. 10 Lakhs, for the accidental death of their son Vinod.

4. In response to the notices, both the respondents appeared and submitted their written statement (Exh.12) on record. The respondent denied the allegations of rash and negligent driving of ST Bus involved in the accident. It has been contended that deceased Vinod himself lost control of the bicycle and banged on the ST Bus. The respondents are not liable for any amount of damages/ compensation in this case.

5. After considering rival submissions, the learned Member of the Tribunal framed requisite issues and proceeded to adjudicate the matter in controversy on merit. In order to establish claim, the claimant Parmeshwar Maske, stepped into the witness box and adduced his evidence on oath (Exh.19). He has also examined PW-2 Raosaheb Pandit (Exh.22) and PW-3 – Jayram Kale (Exh.23) in support of his claim. The claimants also relied upon the documents of police record comprising Accident Report (Exh.25). FIR (Exh.26), Spot Panchanama (Exh.27), Post Mortem Report (Exh.28) Charge sheet (Exh29) and Inquest Panchanama (Exh.30) etc. In refutal, respondents examined driver of the ST Bus involved in the accident at (Exh.32). The learned member of the Tribunal, after appreciating oral and circumstantial evidence on record, was pleased to allow the claim petition partly and issued directions to both the respondents for payment of sum of Rs. 6,70,000/- towards compensation, jointly and severally, to the claimants i.