JUDGMENT :

Alka Sarin, J. (Oral) 

1. Present appeal has been preferred by the claimant-appellants aggrieved by the quantum of compensation as well as the finding whereby contributory negligence of Harpreet Singh (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') was held to be 50% by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sangrur (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') vide award dated 15.07.2014.

2. The brief facts relevant to the present lis are that on 15.12.2012 the deceased - Harpreet Singh - alongwith Dharamjit Singh was going to Patiala in a Maruti Zen Car bearing registration No.PB-31-D-6131, which was being driven by the deceased and Dharamjit Singh was sitting as a passenger. They were being followed by Kirpal Singh and Rajvir Singh in their Jeep bearing registration No.PB-13-W-3200. At about 06.00 am, when they reached near bypass of village Nadampur towards Patiala, a truck bearing registration No.PB-13-V-9767 (hereinafter referred to as the 'offending vehicle'), owned by respondent Nos.1 and 2 and driven by respondent No.1, was parked in the middle of the road without any indicators or parking lights. On account of the darkness, the deceased could not notice the offending vehicle parked in the middle of the road as a result of which he hit the offending vehicle. Both the occupants of the Maruti Zen car died on the spot. FIR was registered. The claim petition was filed by the claimant-appellants averring therein that the deceased was 20 years of age and had completed his pre-sea training from Indus Seafarers Training Academy, Chennai (under Omega Maritime Management Services Private Limited) approved by Director General of Shipping, Government of India and had obtained a certificate-cum-seafarers identity document from Government of India and was also selected for ship training and was to get job in Indian Merchant Navy. In a written statement jointly filed by respondent Nos.1 and 2 the accident was denied. However, it was admitted that the offending vehicle was owned by respondent Nos.1 and 2. Respondent No.3-Insurance Company also filed it's written statement raising various preliminary objections. On merits it was stated that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid and effective driving licence and that the offending vehicle was not being driven as per provision of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

3. From the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed :

1. Whether death of Harpreet Singh took place as a result of motor vehicle accident on 15.12.2012 at about 06.00 am in the area of village Nadampur bypass on Bhawanigarh-Patiala road due to rash and negligent driving of respondent Buta Singh of truck bearing registration No.PB-13-V-9767 ? OPA

2. If issue No.1 is proved, whether the applicants are entitled to compensation, if so, to what amount and from whom ? OPA

3. Whether respondent No.1 was holding a valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident ? OPR-1 4. Relief.

4. The Tribunal on issue No.1 though held that the accident stood proved, however, held that the deceased - Harpreet Singh - driver of the car, had not been driving his vehicle with care and caution and hence, held it to be a case of contributory negligence to the extent of 50%. The Tribunal in the awarded the following compensation holding appellant No.1 entitled to the compensation and appellant Nos.2 and 3, who are father and sister of the deceased, were not given any share in compensation. Hence, the present appeal by the claimant-appellants.

5. Learned counsel for the claimant-appellants would contend that the Tribunal, merely on the premise that th