JUDGMENT :

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J .

1. Both the appeals, as noticed above, are being disposed of by this common judgment, having arisen out of the impugned award dated 04.03.2014 passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, Tarn Taran, whereby the claimants (Paramjit Kaur and others) were awarded compensation to tune of Rs.10,12,500/- along with interest @ 6% per annum and the claimants (Parkash Kaur and others) were awarded compensation to tune of Rs.07,42,500/- along with interest @6% per annum. The Insurance company was held liable to pay the compensation to the claimants.

FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 15.08.2011, deceased Balwinder Singh alias Billa along with Kashmir Singh and Lakhwinder Singh were going from their village Brahampura, towards Naushehra Pannuan in order to perform their job of Painter on their separate bicycles. At about 9.00 Α.Μ., when they reached near National Public School, Naushehra Pannuan, in the meantime a truck bearing registration no. PB-11-X-6735 came from the backside which was begin driven by respondent no. 1 in a rash and negligent manner and struck into the bicycle of Balwinder Singh and Kashmir Singh. Respondent no.1 lost his control over the said truck and hit into the trees. Due to this accident Balwinder Singh and Kashmir Singh fell down on the road and received multiple injuries and died at the spot. The said accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of respondent no.1. The matter was reported to the police and FIR No. 100 dated 15.08.2011, u/s 304-A, 279,427 IPC was registered at P.S. Sarhali.

3. Upon notice of the claim petition, respondents appeared and admitted the factum of compensation.

4. From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the learned Tribunal :-

“1. Whether Balwinder Singh died in the motor vehicular accident alleged took place on 15.08.2011 in the area of near National Public School Naushehra Pannuan on account of rash and negligent driving of truck no. PB-11X-6735 by its driver l.e. respondent no.1 Raju, as alleged ?OPP.

2. If issue no.1 is proved, whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation as prayed for, if so to hat extent ?OPP

3. Whether the present claim petition is not maintainable ? OPR.

4. Whether the respondent no.1 Raju was not having any legal and valid driving license at the time of alleged accident ?OPR

5. Relief.”

5. After taking into consideration the pleadings and the evidence on record, the learned Tribunal awarded compensation to the claimants. However, the appellant-Insurance Company was held liable to pay the compensation. Hence, the present appeals.

SUBMISSION OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant–Insurance Company contends that the driving licence of the driver of the offending vehicle is fake, as is evident from the verification report annexed with the memorandum of appeal. It is submitted that the said report could not be produced or proved during the trial since the evidence on behalf of the insurer had already been closed by order of the learned Tribunal. On this basis, learned counsel prays that the present appeal be allowed and that the appellant–Insurance Company be absolved of its liability to satisfy the award of compensation.

7. He further contends that the learned Tribunal erred in law in assessing the monthly income of both the deceased (Balwinder Singh @ Billa and Kashmir Singh) @ Rs.7500/- per month. He, therefore prays that the present appeals be allowed.

8. Learned counsel for the claimants vehemently contends that the liability has rightly been fixed upon the Insurance Company by the learned Tribunal. He further contends that the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side and the claimants have also filed separate appeals bearing FAO No. 8177-2014 titled as Paramjeet Kaur and others vs. Raju and others and FAO No. 6128-2014 titled as Parkash Kaur and others vs. Raju and others, seeking enhancement of the compens