Interpretation of Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 and its application to determine the claimants' entitlement to compensation.

ORDER :

1. By this common judgment, the instant appeals preferred against the common award dated 17.11.2009 (for short, "impugned award") passed by the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, Jammu (for short "the Tribunal") are being disposed of, in that, the issues involved therein the said appeals are akin and analogous to each other.

2. The brief facts emerging from the record would reveal that the claim petitions came to be filed by the claimants/respondents herein in the instant appeals before the Tribunal for compensation under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 (for short the Act of 1988) stating therein that the claimants had fetched green grass from the jungle and loaded the same in a vehicle/truck bearing registration No.JK02G 9235 (for short, "offending vehicle") at the Bhagaliar Dam against the payment of Rs. 10/- per passenger including the grass charged by the driver of the offending vehicle who drove the offending vehicle rashly and negligently as a result whereof, the offending vehicle met with an accident and the claimants travelling therein with their grass sustained injuries whereupon the claimants/respondents herein were shifted to Government Medical College, Jammu for treatment.

The claimants/respondents herein in the aforesaid claim petitions impleaded the owner of the vehicle as party respondent and the United India Insurance Company Limited/appellant herein being the Insurance Company with which the offending vehicle was insured on the date of accident.

The appellant herein in response to the notice issued by the Tribunal in the claim petition appeared and filed objections to the said claim petitions stating therein that the offending vehicle was a goods carrier, carrying passengers at the time of accident against the terms and conditions of the insurance policy and that the offending vehicle was being driven by the driver without being possessed a valid and effective driving license and that the offending vehicle was being plied in violation of the route permit, fitness certificate, registration certificate and the terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy.

3. The Tribunal on the pleadings of the contesting parties framed the following issues:-

1. Whether an accident took place on 6.4.03 near JPI Barrier at Bhagaliar Dam site on Jammu-Srinagar NHW 1A due to the rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle No. 9235 JK02G in the hands of erring driver in which petitioners namely; Bano Begum, Sakeena Begum, Shameema Begum and Khalida Begum sustained grievous nature of injuries? OPP

2. If issue No. 1 is proved in affirmative whether petitioners in all the claim petitions are entitled to the compensation if so to what amount and from whom? OPP

3. Whether driver of offending vehicle at the time of accident was not holding a valid and effective driving license to the knowledge of owner of offending vehicle and as such has violated the terms and conditions of insurance policy? OPR-2

4. Whether the petitioners were traveling in a goods carrier in violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy as such respondent company is not liable to pay any compensation? OPR-2

5. Relief. O.P. Parties.

4. The claimants/respondents herein appeared as their own witnesses as also produced other witnesses as well including Doctors who had treated them in order to prove issues 1 & 2 onus whereof was put on them. Insofar as issues 3 & 4 are concerned, the onus to prove the same was put on the respondent 2 being appellant herein which, however, did not produce any witness in order to prove the said issues.

5. The Tribunal after adjudicating upon the claim petitions and having regard to the facts of the each claim petitions, the evidence on record saddled the appellant herein with liability to pay the compensation to the claimants/respondents herein.

6. The instant appeals, the appellant herein has challenged the impugned award/s inter alia on the grounds that the award has been passed against facts and law and that the Tribunal