JUDGMENT :

1. Admit.

2. The present appeal is finally heard with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

3. Present appeal is preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the Western Coal Fields Limited Padmapur, District Chandrapur challenging the Judgment and Award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandrapur in M.A.C.P. No.85/2014 dated 29.08.2018 by which Tribunal has awarded the compensation of Rs.62,26,400/- inclusive of the amount paid under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

4. Brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as under.

On 17.08.2013 deceased Rajkumar Tiple and Shakil @ Chotu Abdul Sheikh travelling by Scooty bearing MH-34-Q-6325 to Padmapur W.C.L. The driver of the Crane bearing equipment Serial No.4812 was driven rashly and negligently and dashed against Scooty bearing No. MH-34-Q-6325. Due to the said accident, deceased who was riding Scooty died on the spot. Regarding the said accident offence was registered at Durgapur Police Station under Sections 279, 337, 338, 304-A of Indian Penal Code and under Section 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The claimant No.1 is the wife, claimant Nos. 2 and 3 are the children of the deceased. As per contention of the claimants, as the said accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the Crane driver, the claimants are entitled to receive the compensation. The said Crane is owned by opponent No.1 and driven by the opponent No.2. Hence, opponent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation.

5. The claim of the petition was opposed by the respondent No.1 by filing written statement and denied the contentions of the claimant. As per the contention of the respondent No.1, as such the Crane is not a motor vehicle, and therefore provisions of Motor Vehicles Act are not applicable.

6. Learned trial Court has recorded the evidence of the claimants and awarded the compensation at the rate of Rs.62,26,400/-.

7. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandrapur present appeal is preferred by the appellant on the ground that learned trial Court had not considered that the alleged accident has not occurred on a public road but it was occurred on a private road. Moreover, the vehicle involved in the accident is not a vehicle as per the definition given under the Motor Vehicles Act. The further ground is raised by the appellant is that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is exorbitant and excessive one and liable to be set aside.

8. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Shriram Chopde holding for learned Advocate Mr. D. L. Dharmadhikari for the appellant submitted that in fact the claimants are not entitled to receive any compensation as vehicle Crane is involved in the accident which is not covered under the definition of vehicle under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act. He further submitted that there was a contributory negligence on the part of the deceased and the alleged accident has occurred in the private premises of the W.C.L., and therefore claimants are not entitled to receive the compensation. He further submitted that the quantum awarded is excessive and exorbitant one. The learned trial Court has erroneously added 30% towards future prospects instead of 25%. For all above these grounds, the Judgment and Award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal deserves to be quashed and set aside.

9. Per contra, learned Advocate Mr. P. R. Agrawal for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 submitted that the vehicle Crane is very well covered under the definition of the vehicle under the Motor Vehicles Act. He further submitted that there is no pleading regarding the contributory negligence as well as no pleadings as to that accident occurred in the private premises of the W.C.L., and therefore W.C.L. is not liable to pay compensation. He further submitted that the 30% towards the future prospects is rightly added by the trial Court and hence no in