1. 1. Since all these misc. appeals relate to common award dated 9-8-1996 passed in claim Petitions No. 225/1990, 232/1990, 233/1990, 234/1990, 235/1990, 251/1990, 257/1990 and 3/1911 by Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Tonk, (in short the MACT) they are being disposed by this common judgment.

2. The facts have been set out in the impugned judgment and hence I am not repeating the same here except wherever necessary.

3. The facts in brief are that on 20-9-1990 at about 8.00 a.m. jeep No. RRR 4211 was going for Bhilwara when it reached Mendwas it dashed against the Truck No. RSR 2577. This accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the jeep with excessive speed by its driver i.e. Akbar Hussain, who is respondent No. 1 and due to sudden stopping of the truck in rash and negligent manner by its driver respondent No. 4. In the accident Dilip Bhargava, Moti, Samunder Singh, Jethanand, Prem Chand, Smt. Kamla and Noor Mohammed died and Sahjade Miyan sustained serious injuries. Sahajade Miyan and legal representatives of Moti, Samundra Singh, Jethanand, Prem Chand, Smt. Kamla and Noor Mohammed filed separate claim petitions, which were consolidated and the same were decided by the common award dated 9-8-1996 of the MACT.

4. In the claim petitions filed by the claimants, the respondents 1 and 2 filed written statement. It was stated that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the truck driver and the owner and driver and insurance company of the truck were liable for compensation. The respondent No. 3 United India Insurance Company in its written statement stated that the jeep was insured with them as a private vehicle and only 6 persons were to be travel in the vehicle whereas it was used for carrying 10 passengers and it was stated that it was only liable to pay compensation in the amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- and since it was a case of breach of policy hence no liability can be fastened on the insurance company.

5. Respondents 4 and 5 in their written statement stated that at the time of accident the truck was going from Delhi to Tonk for village Dhua Kallan and when it reached near Mendwas about half kilometer the truck driver after parking it went for urination and the jeep came back side of the truck and hit it on account of which accident occurred. Since the truck was stationery and hence no liability can be fastened on the insurance company and the owner and driver of the truck.

6. The respondent No. 6 who was driver of the truck stated that it was due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the jeep on account of which the accident took place and the respondents 4 and 5 are not responsible for payment of compensation. It was also stated that even if on account of any mistake of the truck, they are only responsible for contributory negligence. The MACT framed five issues.

7. The parties produced evidence. After considering the claim petitions, written statements and the evidence produced by the parties, the MACT allowed the claim petitions and directed the Oriental Insurance Company, owner of the jeep and driver, to pay the compensation in the ratio of 75% and 25% for the contributory negligence to the claimants. The United India Insurance Company was absolved from its liablity to pay compensation on account of breach of policy by the driver and owner of the jeep. Against the common award dated 9-8-1996, the Oriental Insurance Company filed Appeal Nos. 133, 241 to 246 of 1997. The legal representatives of the deceased who died in the accident filed Appeal Nos. , 39, 46, 62, 120, 121, 122 and 540 of 1997 for enhancement of the compensation. It may be mentioned that the Oriental Insurance Co. has not filed any appeal against the award dated 9-8-1996 passed in Claim Case No. 3/1991. Similarly in claim case No. 251/1990, the claimants have not filed any appeal for enhancement of the compensation. It may also be mentioned that on account of breach of policy the insurance company of