The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of negligence in a motor accident case and the assessment of compensation components based on legal precedents.

I.S.Mehta, J.

The instant appeal is arising from the impugned award dated 31.03.2015 in MACT Case No. 235/10 passed by Ms. Kiran Bansal Presiding Officer, MACT North East District, Kakardooma Courts, New Delhi (henceforth referred to as the Tribunal) whereby Respondent No.2 was awarded Rs. 10,10,036/- (including interim compensation) at 9% p.a. from the date of filing of petition till the date of its realization.

2. The brief facts arising from the pleadings are that on 18.06.2010 deceased Azam alongwith one Late Satyapal Singh and Late Anuj @ Monu were going towards Mohan Nagar in a tempo bearing No. UP- 14 BJ-1623. When they reached in front of Krishna Engineering College, one dumper bearing No. HR-55-E-8268 (hereinafter called the offending vehicle) was coming from the opposite side driven by driver Dayanand Singh (Respondent No.8 herein) at a very high speed, rashly and negligently hitting the tempo head on. As a result of which Satyapal died at the spot itself and Azam and Anuj succumbed to their injuries in the hospital. The postmortem of the dead body of deceased Azam was done vide Postmortem Report No. 384/10. The accident occurred due to negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle. Thereafter, an FIR, FIR No. 933/10 under Section 279/304A/427 was got registered at Police Station Sahibabad, Ghaziabad, UP on the same day.

3. Thereafter, a claim petition was filed on 10.08.2010 against driver Dayanand Singh, owner Vijay Kumar Jain and Appellant Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. being insurer of the offending vehicle. All were alleged to be jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation to the claimants in the petition.

4. Written statement to the petition on behalf of driver Dayanand Singh (Respondent no.8 herein) and owner Vijay Kumar Jain (Respondent no.9 herein) was filed jointly. Oriental Insurance Company (Appellant herein) has filed a separate written statement.

5. Driver and Owner in their written statement denied any liability from the accident and submitted that offending vehicle i.e. dumper bearing No. HR-55-E-8268 was insured with Insurance Company and the vehicle was driven by driver Dayanand Singh with valid licence No. PC.466/Farukhabad/99 dated 19.02.99 which was valid from 17.06.08 to 16.06.11.

6. Appellant Oriental Insurance Company has filed written statement and claimed that claim petition is misconceived and is based on surmises and conjectures. However, the offending vehicle was duly insured with Insurance Company vide Insurance policy No. 215200/31/2010/5267 for period from 08.02.2010 to Midnight of 07.02.2011 in the name of Vijay Kumar Jain (owner) and denied his liability to pay any compensation. Claim petition is based on ulterior motive and prays for dismissal of the claim petition.

7. On basis of pleadings of the parties issues were framed on 08.08.2011 by the Ld. Tribunal.

8. Claimant Sh. Vahid Khan (Respondent No.1 herein) has examined himself as PW1 and filed his affidavit Ex.PW1/A as Examination-in-chief and relied upon the documents i.e. Photocopy of his driving license Ex.PW1/1, medical record of deceased as Ex.PW1/2 and photocopy of criminal case record Mark A. Claimants have also examined Imran Khan as PW2. He filed his affidavit Ex. PW2/1 and relied upon the documents i.e. voter card Ex.PW2/1. Thereafter, petitioner's evidence was closed on 08.05.2013. Appellant Insurance Company has examined Ms. Anita Dhawan, Assistant Manager, Oriental Insurance Company as R3W1 and Sh. Ashutosh Shukla, Sr. Assistant, ARTO Farukhabad, UP has been examined as R3W2. Owner Vijay Kumar Jain has examined himself as R2W3 and filed his affidavit Ex.R2W3/1. Thereafter, respondent's evidence was closed on 30.01.2014.

9. On the basis of pleadings and evidence led by the parties, impugned award dated 31.03.2015 was passed by learned Tribunal. Aggrieved from the said award appellant has preferred pre