V.M. VELUMANI, J.

1. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the fair and decreetal order dated 26.11.2010, passed in MCOP.No.105 of 2010, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Court/Fast Track Court-II, Tuticorin.

2. The appellant, Insurance Company is the second respondent in MCOP.No.105 of 2010. The respondents 1 to 3 are the petitioners/claimants. The fourth respondent is owner of the Van involved in the accident, and the appellant is the insurer. The fifth respondent is the owner of other vehicle, involved in the accident and the sixth respondent is the Insurance Company of the said vehicle.

3. The respondents 1 to 3 claimed a sum of Rs. 21,00,000/- as compensation, before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Court/Fast Track Court-II, Tuticorin. The Tribunal, by order dated 26.11.2010, awarded compensation of Rs. 6,39,500/- together with interest and directed the appellant and fourth respondent to pay jointly or severally the said sum, to the claimants. Against the said order, the present appeal has been filed by the appellant/Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited.

4. The facts of the case are as follows:-

(a) The deceased was a load man in the employment of fourth respondent. On 01.10.2009, he was travelling as a load man, in the load van, belonging to the fourth respondent. The driver of the van was driving the van in a rash and negligent manner. At about 7.00 p.m, near Maravanmadam Bishop Caldwel College, in order to overtake another vehicle, without noticing the vehicle coming in the opposite direction, hit against the vehicle belonging to the fifth respondent. In the said accident, the deceased and others sustained grievous injuries. The deceased was taken to Government Medical College Hospital, Tuticorin, wherein the Doctor reported that deceased was brought dead. The accident took place only due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the load van, belonging to the fourth respondent. A criminal case was registered against the said driver at Pudukkottai Police Station in Crime No. 413 of 2009.

(b) The respondents 1 to 3 filed MCOP.No.105 of 2010, claiming a sum of Rs. 21,00,000/- as compensation, against the fourth respondent and appellant. The respondents 5 and 6 were impleaded as formal parties.

(c) The respondents 4 and 5 remained ex parte, before the Tribunal.

(d) The appellant filed counter statement denying their liability to pay compensation. The deceased travelled in the goods carriage vehicle as unauthorised passenger, in violation of terms of policy. The accident took place only due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the fifth respondent. The fifth respondent using his influence gave a false complaint and First Information Report has been lodged against the driver of the fourth respondent. The respondents 5 and 6 are alone liable to pay compensation, if any ordered by Tribunal. The appellant also stated that the respondents 1 to 3 must prove the age and income of the deceased and also must prove that the load van of fourth respondent, was insured with the appellant, at the time of accident and that the driver of the fourth respondent had a valid driving licence at the time of accident. They have also stated that the claim under various heads are excessive.

(e) The sixth respondent in his counter stated that the accident took place only due to rash and negligent driving by driver of the load van of fourth respondent and prayed for dismissal of MCOP against the respondents 5 and 6.

(f) Before the Tribunal, the first respondent was examined as PW.1 and one Nanthagopala Krishnan, eye witness of the accident was examined as PW.2 and six documents were marked as Exs.A1 to A6. The fourth respondent examined himself as RW.1 and one Kamanathan, Executive Legal Officer of the appellant was examined as RW.2 and marked 7 document