JUDGMENT :

With the consent of the parties, heard finally.

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants/claimants being aggrieved by the impugned award dated 21.09.2022 passed by the Chief Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur (C.G.) (for short, 'the Tribunal) in Claim Case No. 608/2021, whereby the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.12,12,500/- along with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its realisation. Hence, this appeal by the appellants seeking enhancement. Parties to this appeal shall hereinafter be referred as per their description before the Claims Tribunal.

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 02.06.2021 at about 12:00 noon, after bathing, when the deceased Jhamman Banjare was waiting for his wife on the road side, at the same time, truck bearing registration No.CG-08-AE- 6444 being driven by Non-applicant No.1/driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the deceased Jhamman Banjare, resulting therein, the deceased died on the spot and her wife also sustained injuries. Matter was reported to the Police Station Abhanpur, Dist. Raipur, where crime No.216/2021 under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-A of IPC was registered.

3. On account of sad and sudden demise of Jhamman Banjare, the appellants/claimants, being legal representatives, filed a claim petition stating, inter alia, that at the time of accident, he was 44 years old and was earning Rs.1,000/- per month by doing pulses business and being legal heirs they are fully dependents upon him, as such, claimed a sum of Rs.73,00,000- under various heads.

4. The Respondent/Non-applicant No.1/driver did not file written statement and remained ex parte whereas respondent No.2/Non-applicant No.2/owner filed reply stating, inter alia, that the driver was not responsible for the cause of accident whereas the deceased himself was responsible; at the time of accident, the driver was possessing valid and effective driving licence and that the offending vehicle was insured with respondent No.3/insurer, therefore, in case of any liability being fastened, the same could be indemnified by the insurance company. However, Non-applicant No.2 remained ex parte at the evidence stage. While admitting the fact that Non-applicant No.2 is the registered owner of the offending vehicle, which was insured with the insurer as per terms and conditions of the policy, Respondent/Non-applicant No.3, the insurer has contested the claim mainly on the ground that the vehicle in question has been used in violation of the policy as the driver of it, was not possessing the effective and valid driving license, therefore, no liability could be fastened upon it.

5. The Tribunal, vide impugned award dated 21.09.2022, after considering the evidence led by the parties, has held that the alleged accident took place on 02.06.2021 due to rash and negligent driving of Respondent/Non-applicant No.1, driver of the offending vehicle. It held that it was not established that the offending vehicle was used in violation of the insurance policy. Having held as such, the Claims Tribunal passed the impugned award/order in favour of the appellants/claimants and against the Respondent/Non-applicant No.3/insurer.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the amount of compensation granted to the claimants vide impugned award is on lower side, which needs to be enhanced suitably.

7. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 2 & 3 submit that the Tribunal, after due and proper appreciation of the evidence led before it, awarded just and proper amount of compensation, therefore, findings so recorded by the learned Claims Tribunal do not warrant any interference

8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the Tribunal including the evidence adduced by the parties minutely.

9. Perusal of the record would show tha