JUDGMENT :

This is a claimants’ appeal, arising out of the judgment and award passed by Mr. Naresh Singh, the then Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Special Judge (Dacoity Affected Areas) Etawah dated 31.07.2003, rejecting the claim petition.

2. The seven appellants here are the legal representatives of the late Dinesh Kumar Tripathi, who died in a motor accident. A detailed reference to each of the seven appellants before this Court shall be made a little later in this judgment, disclosing their relationship to the deceased and other matters.

3. The facts giving rise to Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 127 of 1997 are that on the 29th of May, 1996, at about half past nine in the evening hours, Dinesh Kumar Tripathi was riding Maruti Car bearing registration No. UP 78L/9280, belonging to a friend of his. The car was proceeding from Kanpur to Agra. As the car reached Village Kanaita within the local limits of Police Station Matsena, District Firozabad, a truck bearing registration No. UP 83/9831 approached from the opposite direction and hit the Maruti Car head-on. As a result of the impact, Dinesh Kumar Tripathi died, whereas all other occupants in the car were badly injured.

4. A First Information Report was lodged with the Police, giving rise to Crime No. 88 of 1996, Police Station Matsena, District Firozabad. Later on, Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was added. According to the claimants, the First Information Report was lodged against the driver of truck bearing registration No. UP 83/9831. It is the further case of the claimant-appellants that at the time of the accident, the driver of the Maruti Car was proceeding from Kanpur to Agra at a controlled speed, whereas the offending truck approached from the Agra end of the road at a high speed, driven negligently. The driver of the offending truck did not bear in mind the other vehicles moving on the road and hit the ill-fated car, moving to the wrong side of the road. The injured in the accident were rushed to the District Hospital, Firozabad by members of the public who had gathered at the site of accident. The driver of the offending truck, abandoned his vehicle at the site of the accident and fled away.

5. The claimant-appellants say that at the time of the accident, Dinesh Kumar Tripathi was a healthy man. He was gainfully employed at Kanpur in the business of property dealing and transport. He provided for all members of the family out of the profits of his business and all of them were dependent upon him. His death in the accident has destituted the family, leaving them no means of sustenance. Dinesh Kumar Tripathi’s wife had predeceased him, leaving behind three minor children. With the passing away of Tripathi, the minors have been utterly orphaned. They were provided for by the deceased, who would look after them. There is, according to the claimants, no means of sustenance for the minors in future. The claimant-appellants also say that Tripathi’s brothers, his father and mother were all dependent upon him. The deceased would provide for all the claimant-appellants. His demise has plunged the family into a financial crisis. Their future has turned bleak. Tripathi’s death has caused the claimants to suffer physically, mentally and economically, a loss that is irreparable.

6. It is averred in the claim petition that the drivers of both the vehicles were not individually vigilant. The driver of the offending truck was driving at an uncontrolled speed, whose negligence caused the unfortunate accident. The claimants demanded a total compensation of 20,60,000/- under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Rs.20,60,000/- under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, [‘the Act of 1988’ for short] and a sum of 4,62,833.34 under Section 163A, claiming that the sum of Rs.20,60,000/- under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 compensation be ordered to be paid with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of institution of the claim until reali