Hon’ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J.—Instant appeals have been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 17.11.2009, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/VII Additional District Judge, Faizabad in M.A.C.P. No. 137 of 2007 (Rajendra Pratap Singh and another v. Rajaband Khan and others) filed under Section 166 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. While insurance company has challenged the determination of compensation, the claimants have sought enhancement over and above the amount awarded, as such, both the appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. On 27.5.2007 at 9.00 p.m., an accident occurred wherein motorcycle bearing registration No. UP 42K 3931, upon which deceased and two others were travelling, got hit by Jeep bearing registration No. UP 42A 3122, resulting in grievous injuries caused to Vipin Kumar, who died as a consequence thereof. The motorcycle was being driven by the uncle of the deceased, namely Jitendra Pratap Singh, who also died in the same accident. The other rider of the motorcycle, Mata Baksh Singh, father-in-law of the deceased, also sustained injuries. It is claimed that while the motorcycle with three riders travelling from village Manoodeeh towards Amaniganj reached at the intersection of metalled road and culvert over dry canal, it was hit near village Satnapur by the Jeep bearing registration No. UP 42A 3122 due to rash and negligent driving of the Jeep. Jitendra Pratap Singh, who was driving the motorcycle, died on spot. Vipin Kumar fell in the canal lying dry, and he was taken out by others and sent to the district hospital, where he died. The deceased was 24 years of age and is claimed to be working as a skilled worker with M/s. Laxmi Diamond Company, Amraili, Gujarat, from where he was alleged to be drawing salary of Rs. 10,000/- per month. The claim under different heads amounting to Rs. 30,00,000/- has been instituted by the claimants, who are the parents of the deceased, against the owner of the Jeep, Insurance Company and its driver, who have been arrayed as respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 respectively in the claim petition.

3. Notices were issued in the claim petition and the owner denied the factum of accident with his Jeep. The Insurance Company also filed its written statement denying the accident. However, the fact that the Jeep was insured with the company has been admitted. The tribunal framed following issues on 18.12.2008 :

(i) Whether on account of rash and negligent driving of Jeep bearing registration No. UP 42A 3122 the accident occurred at 9.00 p.m. on 17.5.2007, resulting in death of Vipin Kumar due to injuries sustained in the accident?

(ii) Whether the claim is bad on account of non-impleadment of motorcycle owner and its insurance company?

(iii) Whether the driver of the Jeep on the relevant date possessed valid driving licence?

(iv) Whether the Jeep bearing registration No. UP 42A 3122 was insured with United India Insurance Company and if it was so, then to what consequence?

(v) Claimants are entitled to how much compensation and from whom?

4. The claimants filed documentary evidence in the form of F.I.R., charge-sheet submitted by the police after investigation, certified copy of site-plan, postmortem report, certificate of employment of deceased Vipin Kumar with M/s. Laxmi Diamond Company and the certificate of income issued by the company.

5. The respondents filed driving licence of the driver and registration certificate of the Jeep.

6. Oral evidence of Ram Bahadur Singh, Mata Baksh Singh son of Badalu Singh and Rajendra Pratap Singh son of Dalbahadur Singh were led on behalf of the claimants as C.P.W.1, C.P.W.2 and C.P.W.3 respectively. On behalf of the respondents oral evidence of Shitala Prasad son of Siddh Ram Pandey as O.P.W.1 was adduced.

7. Tribunal, on issue No. 1, considered the oral and documentary evidence brought on record and came to the conclusion that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of