The court established that the burden of proof for negligence lies with the claimant, and proper assessment of income is crucial in compensation claims.

JUDGMENT

Vinit Kumar Mathur, J. - The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant/Insurance Company against the judgment and award dated 26/11/2020 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pali in Motor Accident Claims Case No.101/2018, whereby an amount of Rs.18,84,400/- has been awarded to the claimants/respondents on account of death of Wag Singh in the accident which occurred in the intervening night of 31/12/2017-01/01/2018.

2. The Tribunal, after framing the issues, evaluating the evidence on record and hearing counsel for the parties, decided the claim petition of the claimants/respondents.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company has attacked the finding of the Tribunal on issue No.1 on the ground that learned Tribunal has not evaluated the evidence in the correct perspective and, therefore, has erred while recording the finding on issue No.1 against the present appellant.

5. Learned counsel further submits that as per the site plan prepared by the Police during the course of investigation, it is borne out that the Jeep was being driven by Wag Singh on the wrong side. He submits that the road on which the accident took place was four-lane and it was the driver of the Jeep who came from the opposite direction, whereas Tractor was moving in right direction. Learned counsel further submits that the fact that the Jeep was being driven on the wrong direction was noticed by the Police Authorities in their Rojnamcha prepared immediately after the accident. Learned counsel further submits that even as per the reply to the notice received by the owner of the Tractor under Section 133 of the Motor Vehicles Act and by the driver of the Tractor under Section 134 of the Motor Vehicles Act, it is clear that the Jeep was being driven from the wrong direction and the Tractor was being driven by driver of the Tractor in correct direction. Therefore, no fault can be found with the driver of the Tractor. Learned counsel further submits that even as per the pleadings of the claimants, it is not clear that the Jeep was being driven in the right direction. Learned counsel submits that for the claim to be maintained under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, negligence of the offending vehicle is required to be proved for getting the compensation. To buttress his contention, learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon the judgments of Hon?ble Supreme Court in the cases of the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Meena Variyal & Ors.,(2007) 5 SCC 428 & the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Premlata Shukla& Ors.,(2007)13 SCC 476.

6. The second contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the finding of the Tribunal on issue No.3 is also laconic as the Tribunal has taken into consideration only the submissions made in the claim petition and relying upon the statement of AW.1 Smt.Sohan Kanwar, the income of the deceased has been assessed as Rs.9,000/- per month, which is on higher side. He submits that the Tribunal, while determining the annual income of the deceased, has wrongly relied upon the judgment of Hon?ble Supreme Court in the case of Kala Devi & Ors vs Bhagwan Das Chauhan & Ors, M.A.C.D.2014 (S.C.) 459.

7. Learned counsel submits that there is no documentary evidence on record which shows that the deceased was earning Rs.9,000/-per month and merely producing the driving licence, it cannot be said with certainty that the monthly income of the deceased was Rs.9,000/- per month. He submits that the specifications of the deceased with respect to his livelihood has not been made in the claim petition and it has only been mentioned that the deceased was earning Rs.18,000-20000 on account of performing the work of a driver. He further submits that nothing has been brought on record to show that the deceased was involved in purchasing and selling of the vehicles through which any income was derived by the deceased Wag Singh. To canvass his argument, learned counse