The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of compensation for fatal injuries in a motor accident, considering the age and income of the deceased, and the liability of the insurance company based on the timing of the accident.

( 1 ) THIS appeal under section 110-D of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1939 (hereinafter called the Act ) is directed against the. judgment and order dated 21st December, 1973, of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Delhi whereby the appel-lants claimants wsre awarded a sum of Rs. 10,200 as compensation arming, on account of fatal injuries sustained by their ancestor Shri Ram. Singh in a motor accident which took place on 7th February, 1968. The appellants claimants claim enhancement of compensation to the extent of Rs. 50,000. The respondent insurance company on the other hand has filed crossobjections praying that the claim of the appellants be dismissed.

( 2 ) RAM Singh son of Santa Singh was involved in an accident on February 7, 1968 at about 10. 45 p. m. He was crossing the road and had crossed more than half of the road when a taxi No. DLT 2257 driven by Sukh Raj driver, respondent No. 1. rashly and negligently struck Ram Singh deceased as a result of which he sustained injuries. After the accident he was re-moved to the hospital where he died wathin four days of the acci-dent Joginder Singh, respondent No. 2 is the owner of the said vehicle, while New India Insurance Company Limited, respondent No. 3 is the insurer of the said vehicle DLT 2257. The deceased was a motor mechanic, owned a workshop at Roshanara Road, Delhi and his monthly income was stated to be Rs. 500. Respondent No. I is an employee of respondent No. 2 and it is alleged that while he was driving the car he struck the deceased as a result of which the deceased sustained injuries and there-after died. It is alleged that respondent No. 1 was driving the car rashly and negligently. The respondents in their written statements denied the various allegations of the appellants. It is alleged that the accident took place due to carelessness on the part of the deceased who suddenly started crossing the road when the taxi was hardly ten yards from him, that the taxi was being driven at normal speed. That the driver immediately applied brakes and tried his best to avoid this accident. In the alternative it was pleaded that the deceased was guilty of con-tributory negligence. It is however admitted that taxi D. LT 2257 was owned by respondent No. 2 and was insured with respondent No. 3 and that respondent No. 1 was driving the vehicle. The Tribunal after recording evidence held that the accident resulting in the. death of Ram Singh was due to rash and negligent driving of the taxi on the part of respondent No. 1 and the deceased was not guilty of contributory negligence. After taking into consideration the income and life expectancy of the deceased a sum of Rs. 10,200. 00 was awarded to the appellants as compensa-tion jointly and severally against the respondents with future interest at 6 % per annum from the date of the award till payment if the awarded amount is not paid within two months from the date of the award.

( 3 ) THE appellants legal representatives of the deceased not being satisfied with the compensation awarded to them have filed this appeal and the insurance company, respondent No. 3, has filed cross-objections.

( 4 ) THE first question for decision is whether the deceased died as a result of the accident arising out of the rash and negligent driving. The factum of accident is not disputed. The respondents have not examined any witness. The driver of the vehicle i. e. respondent No. I has also not been produced. It is in evi-dence that there were two occuapants of the vehicle at the time of accident and those occupants have also not been produced. Evidence of the driver and the two occupiants of the taxi was material and good evidence to rebut the claim of the appellants but they have not been produced. The appellants on the other hand have examined three witnesses besides the widow of the deceased. Public Witness 1 Dr. Bishnu Kumar, Maulana Azad Medical College, deposes Aat he conducted post mortem examination on February 12, 1968 on the body o