JUDGMENT

J.J. Munir, J. - This is a claimants appeal, arising out of the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ Additional District Judge, Court No.12, Allahabad dated 12.02.2008 passed in MACP No. 365 of 2005.

2. Heard Ms. Deepali Srivastava Sinha, learned Counsel for the claimant-appellants and Mr. Rajeev Ojha, learned Counsel for respondent No. 2/Insurance Company. No one appears on behalf of respondent No. 1.

3. According to the claimant-appellants (for short, 'the claimants'), Vijay Singh Kushwaha was travelling on board Jeep, bearing registration No. UP-70S/9177 on the 23rd of May, 2005. The vehicle was moving between Karari and Allahabad (now Prayagraj). At about 2:30 in the afternoon, on account of the driver of the said vehicle driving it rashly and negligently, it collided with a Mahua tree. In consequence, Kushwaha sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. At the time of his demise, Kushwaha was about 28 years. He was engaged in dairy business and agriculture. He would earn, according to the claimants, a sum of Rs. 10,000/- per mensem. A First Information Report about the accident was lodged with Police Station Sarai Akil, District Kaushambi. On the basis of the said report, Case Crime No. 77 of 2005, under Sections 279 , 304A IPC was registered. The deceased's body was sent for autopsy to Allahabad on 25.05.2005. The deceased has left behind him his wife, Smt. Kusum Devi, aged 28 years, two sons, Shubham and Sukesh, aged 7 years and 6 years, respectively, besides his mother, Smt. Sharda Devi, aged 70 years. Each of the aforesaid heirs of the deceased were dependent upon him. The claimants, therefore, instituted this claim petition before the Tribunal, seeking compensation in the sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- under Section 166 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988 (for short, 'the Act') and a sum of Rs. 50,000/- separately under Section 140 of the Act. Interest at the rate of 12% per annum was claimed from the date of accident.

4. A written statement was filed by Ram Chandra Kesarwani, opposite party No. 2 to the claim petition, who is the owner of the Jeep. He shall hereinafter be referred to as 'the owner'. The owner is impleaded as respondent No. 1 to this appeal. In his written statement, the owner has generally denied the claimants' allegations and asserted that the Jeep in question was not involved in any accident on 23.05.2005 at 2:30 p.m. nor was the deceased travelling on board the same. It has been averred that a false First Information Report has ben lodged with the Police by the claimants. It has, however, been pleaded that the Jeep in question was insured with the National Insurance Company from 27.07.2004 to 26.07.2005, regarding which Insurance Cover Note No. G-3/35912 was issued. At the time of the accident, the driver of the Jeep held a valid and effective driving licence. The other papers of the vehicle were also in order. It was the owner's stand that in case his vehicle is found involved in the accident, liability to pay compensation would fall on the Insurance Company's shoulder.

5. A separate written statement was filed on behalf of the National Insurance Company (for short, 'the Insurers') denying the claimants' allegations. It was said that the claimants had to prove their case pleaded in the petition. It was averred further that the deceased was not travelling on board the Jeep in question and he did not die in consequence of the accident involving the driver's negligence. It is also the Insurance Company's case that the deceased was himself negligent. The claimants have not filed copies of the FIR, the charge sheet, the site plan, the postmortem report, the Jeep's permit, Registration Certificate, the Insurance Policy and the driver's driving licence. The Insurers also asserted that they are not answerable for the loss sustained on account of a motor accident by a vehicle, that is driven in breach of the policy.

6. On the pleadings of parties, four issues were framed. Since this appeal is