The main legal point established in the judgment is the assessment of compensation in cases of vehicular accidents under the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, and the determination of contributory negligence.

1. Impugned Award of 8th April, 2015 grants compensation of Rs.67,49,856/- with interest @ 8% per annum to respondents-Claimants on account of death of IBP Company’s Divisional Manager-Ajay Kumar Sharma, aged 46 years, in a vehicular accident on 3rd January, 2006.

2. The factual background of this case, as noticed in the impugned Award, is as under:-

“This is a petition u/s 166 and 140 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as M.V. Act) for grant of compensation. This was one of the old MACT cases pending before this Tribunal. In brief the relevant facts of the case as mentioned in the petition are that one Sh. Ajay Kumar Sharma expired in road traffic accident on 03-01-2006 at about 1.45 p.m. while driving Maruti Wagon R bearing registration no. DL 8CH 4853. It is mentioned in the petition that on the said date and time the deceased was proceeding at GTK Road situated within the area of Village Lalpur, Kosarha on way from Allahabad to Varanasi and at that time the car was proceeding on proper side of the highway at moderate speed and there was a stationary truck bearing registration no. UP 65H 5172 parked on the highway ahead of the car without any indication on and around the truck that the truck is stationary on the road. It is further mentioned that the moment Sh. Ajay Kumar Sharma, the driver of the said car gathered that a truck is stationary on the road, he applied brakes and tried to swerve the car to his left to avoid the impact with the stationary truck, however, despite his best efforts the front portion of the car struck against the rear portion of the truck and on account of impact, car was badly damaged and Sh. Ajay Kumar Sharma suffered multiple injuries and succumbed to same on the spot.”

3. On the basis of evidence led, impugned Award has been rendered by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (henceforth referred to as “the Tribunal”) and the breakup of compensation awarded to legal heirs of deceased is as under:-

(i)	Loss of dependency	Rs.65,24,856/-
(ii)	Loss of Care & Guidance for children	Rs.1,00,000/-
(iii)	Funeral expenses	Rs.25,000/-
(iv)	Loss of Consortium	Rs.1,00,000/-
	Total	Rs.67,49,856/-

4. The challenge to impugned Award by learned counsel for appellant-Insurer is on the ground that the claim petition filed by respondents-Claimants ought to have been dismissed by the Tribunal as driver of the insured vehicle was not impleaded as a party. To submit so, reliance is placed upon Supreme Court’s decision in Machindranath Kernath Kasar vs. DS Mylarappa & Ors., (2008) 13 SCC 198. It is submitted by Insurer’s counsel that it is evident from the photographs (Ex.PW1/17 to 1/19) that the accident in question had taken place due to contributory negligence of deceased-Ajay Kumar Sharma, who was driving the WagonR car rashly and negligently. It is pointed out that FIR of this case was registered against unknown driver and later on, the Cancellation Report was submitted in respect of the said FIR and that there is no eye-witness to this accident.

5. It is further submitted by Insurer’s counsel that the ‘personal expenses’ of one-fourth have been deducted by the Tribunal while assessing the income of the deceased, for calculating ‘loss of dependency’ whereas, one-third towards ‘personal expenses’ of deceased ought to have been deducted as two children of deceased were of major age and the father of deceased was not dependent upon him. It is next submitted that the „non-pecuniary damages’ granted by the Tribunal needs to be brought in tune with Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench decision in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors., (2017) 16 SCC 680. It is also submitted that appellant is not liable to pay the penal interest of 12% per annum. Lastly, it is submi