JUDGMENT :

This is an appeal by the Insurance Company, challenging an award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ the Additional District Judge, Court No.9, Mathura dated 09.01.2014, awarding compensation to the claimant-respondents, on account of a fatal motor accident, where one Heera Singh Chaudhary lost his life.

2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are thus:

According to the claimant-respondents, who are respondent nos.1 to 5 to this appeal and shall hereinafter be called 'the claimants', Heera Singh Chaudhary was a Junior Engineer with the Department of Irrigation, Government of U.P. posted at Etah. On 04.09.2011 for the purpose of tail-feed work, he was supervising the removal of shrubs, garbage etc., blocking water passage under the culvert, situate at the Khitauli Turn on the Amapur-Sahwar Road, Etah. At about 2:30 p.m., a truck bearing Registration No. UP-80F-9381, driven negligently and at a high speed, approached from the Etah side. It hit Heera Singh Chaudhary and ran him over. In consequence, Heera Singh Chaudhary sustained grievous injuries and was conveyed for medical aid to the Sahwar Hospital, but declared dead by the doctors there. His dead body was subjected to autopsy at Etah. Since the accident had occurred within the local limits of Police Station Sahwar, District Kashiram Nagar, Case Crime No. 323 of 2011, under Sections 279 , 337, 338, 304A IPC, was registered there.

3. It is the claimants' further case that the deceased Heera Singh Chaudhary was an able bodied and healthy man. He was employed with the Department of Irrigation as a Junior Engineer. He was drawing a monthly salary of Rs.52,041/-, which was the source of livelihood for the family. The entire family, that is to say, the claimants, who are dependents of Heera Singh Chaudhary, have plunged into a financial crisis and their future turned bleak. Accordingly, the claimants have preferred the present claim.

4. It is further pleaded that the accident occurred on account of the offending vehicle being driven at a high speed and negligently by its driver, Kaptan Singh, opposite party no.1 to the claim petition and respondent no.7 here. He shall hereinafter be called 'the driver'. Smt. Mithilesh Kumari, opposite party no.2 to the claim petition, was the registered owner of the offending vehicle at the time of the accident. She is respondent no.6 to this appeal. She will hereinafter be called 'the owner'.

5. The offending truck was insured with the New India Assurance Company Limited, Saukh Adda, Mathura through its Branch Manager (hereinafter referred to as ''the insurers') under a policy valid from 22.01.2011 to 21.01.2012. It is the claimants' case that they are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.65 lakhs, together with interest @ 12% per annum on account of the fatal motor accident, payable by the opposite parties to the claim petition, that is to say, the owner, the insurers and the driver, jointly and severally.

6. The claimants, accordingly, instituted the claim petition under Section 166 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988 (for short, 'the Act') before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ District Judge, Mathura as they are residents of Mathura, a fact on account of which the Tribunal at Mathura had territorial jurisdiction.

7. The Insurers put in a w