JUDGMENT :

This is a claimants' appeal arising out of a judgment and award dated 26.04.2000 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bareilly, seeking enhancement of compensation.

2. Motor Accident Claims Petition No.305 of 1999 was instituted before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ the District Judge, Bareilly on 21.04.1999 on behalf of the five dependents of the late Shakeel Ahmad – two adults and three minors – claiming compensation for his death in a motor accident from the owner and the insurers of Truck No. UP-22-6933. According to the claimants, on 2nd of April, 1999, Shakeel Ahmad was on board Jeep No. UP-25-5646. He was deboarding passengers on one side of the road, at about half past five in the evening, parking the jeep there. In the meantime, Truck No. UP-22-6933, driven negligently and at a high speed, came on from the Kicha end and hit Shakeel Ahmad. He was grievously injured. Shakeel was conveyed to the Primary Health Centre, Baheri for medical aid and thence to the District Hospital, Bareilly for treatment. During treatment, he succumbed to the injuries.

3. According to the five claimant-appellants (for short, 'the claimants'), Shakeel Ahmad was a healthy and hard working young man. His sudden death brought ruin to the family. The claimants sought compensation in the sum of Rs.4,00,000/- together with 18% annual interest. It is the claimants' case that Shakeel Ahmad was aged 30 years and would work on the jeep as an assistant and a partner to the owner. The offending truck was insured with the United India Insurance Co. Ltd. through its Divisional Manager, Rampur Garden, Bareilly (for short, 'the Insurers') vide Cover Note No. 706310, valid from 08.01.1999 to 07.01.2000. The Insurers were impleaded as opposite party No.1 to the claim petition and respondent No.1 to this appeal. The offending truck was owned by one Khalil Ahmad, who was arrayed as opposite party No.2 to the claim petition and respondent No.2 to this appeal. He is the registered owner of the truck and shall hereinafter be called 'the owner'.

4. The owner filed a written statement, where he has acknowledged the fact that he is the registered owner of the offending truck. He has admitted the fact that on 02.04.1999, the truck was proceedings from Kicha to Bareilly. It was driven at a regulated speed, with due care by its driver. The jeep driver was operating the vehicle negligently. The offending truck was insured with the Insurers under a cover note valid from 08.01.1999 to 07.01.2000. The driver of the offending truck was Rajesh Kumar, who held a driving licence valid upto 16.04.2000. He had not been negligent in any way in driving the truck. It was urged that since the offending truck was insured, if any liability be found for the owner, it has to be made good by the Insurers.

5. The Insurers filed a separate written statement and denied the factum of accident. They have denied the deceased's age, avocation and income. It has also been denied that the claimants were dependent upon the deceased. It is also pleaded that all the legal representatives of the deceased have not been made parties and, therefore, the claim petition is bad for non-joinder. A plea has further been raised to the effect that the driver of the offending truck was not made a party, again leading to non-joinder. The accident did not happen on account of negligence of the driver of the offending truck and, therefore, the Insurers are not liable. The owner was operating the offending truck without registration, a fitness certificate and contrary to the terms of the insurance policy. The driver of the truck did not have a valid driving licence. The claimants have come up with an inflated claim. According to the Insurers, the claim petition deserved to be rejected.

6. On the pleadings of parties, the Tribunal struck the following issues (translated into English from Hindi) :