1. Vide order dated 31-3-2001, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ramban passed an award against the Insurance Company. It is stated that a Maruti Car bearing No. JK01-C 5553 driven by Aftab Ahmed Nizami, who was owner of the said car, died as a result of accident which occurred at Chamwalwas on National Highway on 25-11-1997. Two passengers also died in the aforesaid accident, who were traveling in the said car. As a result of the accident, three separate claim petitions came to be filed before the MACT, Ramban by the LRs of the deceased persons. The Claims Tribunal framed the following issues :

Claim Petition No. 6/99

1. Whether Aftab Ahmed Nazami son of applicant died, as a result of accident of Maruti Car No. 5553 JK01C, owned by the deceased and insured with respondent-2 on 25th of November, 1997 while holding valid driving licence and driving the said vehicle? ... OPP.

2. To what compensation the applicants are entitled to.

Claim Petition No. 21/98

1. Whether Mohd. Iqbal Sohil S/O Ghulam Hussain Sohil R/O Gangroo- Ramsoo Tehsil Banihal, Contractor, aged 45 years, earning Rs. 10,000/- a month died on 25-11-97, near Chamwalwas Tehsil Banihal, as a results of rash and negligent driving of Maruti Car No. JK01C 5553 owned and driven by Aftaf Ahmed Nizqami, deceased and respondent-3 which was insured with respondent no. 2 ? OPP

2. To what compensation the applicants are entitled to.

Claim Petition No. 43/99

Whether Sh. Ghulam Hyder Bhat S/o Sonaullah Bhat R/O Saja Tehsil Doda, Junior Engineer PHE, Ramban aged 35 years drawing Rs. 10000/- per month, died on 25-11-97 as a result accident of Maruti Car No. JK01C 5553 insured with respondent no. 1 and owned by deceased Aftab Ahmed Nizami who was holding valid driving licence and respondent no. 3 at Chamwalwas Tehsil Banihal?

2. The Claims Tribunal after examining the witnesses, passed the following award in the aforementioned claims petitions.

3. In Claim Petition No. 6/99, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 12,96,000, in Claim Petition No. 21/98, the Claims Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 6,00,000/- and in Claim Petition No.43/99, the Claims Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 4,58,172/-. In all the three claims petitions, the claimants are entitled to the interest of 9% per annum.

4. It is under these circumstances, the present claim petitions have been filed by the appellant. The appellant has taken two pleas in all the three appeals.

1) According to the appellant, the claims under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act are based on fault liability and it is necessary that in order to be entitled to the claim, the proof of rash and negligent driving, is required to be proved.

2) That the Claims Tribunal awarded compensation without any documentary proof. So, in essence, the appellant has questioned the quantum of the award.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 1st plea raised by the appellant that the owner of the vehicle, who caused the accident would not be liable for any compensation. The appellant has proceeded on the assumption that the claim petition has been filed under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. He states that no issue with regard to the rash and negligent driving was framed by the trial court as the petition is admittedly under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

6. I have perused the record and the claim petitions filed by the claimants. All the claim petitions reveal this information that these claim petitions were not filed under section 166 but filed under section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act.

7. Even though the nomenclature of the petitions has been as under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act but on deeper scrutiny, it is found that there is no column in the claim petition, which deals as to whether accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving. Looking to the claim petition, the information supplied therein, the complexion of issues framed by the Court and the evidence have been led in regard thereto, the claim petiti