JUDGMENT :

ANANDA SEN, J.

1. This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been filed by the Insurance Company, challenging the judgment and award dated 18.11.2014 passed by the District Judge II cum Additional Claim Tribunal, Chatra in Claim Case No. 14 of 2010.

2. Deceased, Md. Anwar along with others were travelling in a Bolero Pick-up van bearing registration number JH-10-T-5436 and was coming from Belgada to Gonia Market to purchase tomatoes. There were several villagers along with him. About 500 yards away from Gonia, the vehicle, which was being driven rashly and negligently, turned turtle, resulting in injuries sustained by passengers and it is the case that the deceased, who was also a passenger of the said vehicle, after being treated in a hospital for ten days, died.

3. On account of death of Md. Anwar, his widow and sons preferred a claim application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, which was numbered as Claim Case No. 14 of 2010. On notice, opposite parties had appeared and filed their respective written statement. The owner of the vehicle pleaded that the deceased was never a trader and the monthly income claimed by the claimants is not correct. They had also taken a plea that deceased was not travelling in the vehicle nor died in the said accident. It has been stated that the driver of the offending vehicle had a valid driving licence to drive the vehicle in question and the vehicle was also insured with National Insurance Company Ltd., which was valid from 29.07.2009 to 28.07.2010. Be it noted that the accident had occurred on 14.10.2009.

4. The Insurance Company had also filed separate written statement and admitted that the vehicle was insured with them at the time of accident, but, had taken a plea that they are not liable to indemnify the owner as the vehicle was a goods carrying vehicle and not a passenger vehicle. It is submitted that goods carrying vehicle was carrying passengers, which was not permissible according to the terms and conditions of the policy. It is their case that there is gross violation of condition of policy the claimants are not entitled to receive any amount by way of compensation from the Insurance Company, rather, it is the owner, who should be saddled with the liability.

5. On the basis of the aforesaid pleadings, Tribunal framed five issues, which were as follows:

(i) Whether the claim case is maintainable?

(ii) Whether deceased Md. Anwar S/o Liyakat Mian R/o Village Belgada, P.S. Simariya, Dist. Chatra died in motor accident due to rash and negligent drive of vehicle (pick up van) bearing Registration No. JH-10T-5436?

(iii) Whether the vehicle involved in the accident is owned by O.P. No. 1 and insured by O.P. No. 2 at the time of accident?

(iv) Whether the driver of the offender vehicle having valid and effective driving license at the time of accident and whether there was breach of condition of the policy?

(v) Whether claimants are entitled to get compensation if so from whom and to what extent?

6. The parties led evidence. The claimants have examined four witnesses and exhibited the FIR, Chargesheet, Postmortem Report, Documents of Insurance, Documents of Registration of the vehicle and the Driving Licence. Neither the owner of the vehicle nor the insurer examined any witness nor produced any documents. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence, led by the parties, have held that the deceased died due to the accident involving the offending vehicle, which was being driven in rash and negligent manner.

The Tribunal further held that the deceased was earning Rs.5000/- per month and was aged about 45 years. The Tribunal also held that the vehicle was duly insured at the time of accident with the National Insurance Company Ltd. Considering all these aspects and applying ‘14’ as multiplier, the Tribunal awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 7,62,944/-.

On the issue of violation of terms and conditions of policy, the Tribunal, on the evidence led by the p