ORDER :

1. This miscellaneous appeal has been filed by the appellant-Insurance Company under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, being aggrieved by award dated 15.07.2008 passed by Additional Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jhabua, in Claim Case No. 46/2007.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company after referring to FIR Ex.P/1 submits that it has been lodged by pillion rider but therein no details of offending motorcycle i.e. color make, model etc are mentioned and neither the name of driver, is mentioned therein. It is mentioned in FIR that rider of motorcycle fled away from the scene of accident immediately. The incident is dated 20.01.2007, FIR was lodged on 20.01.2007 and motorcycle has been seized on 20.03.2007. Chargesheet has been filed on 22.03.2007. Appellant has not examined Ganpat who lodged FIR. The appellants have examined Jhetu (PW-2) but his name is not mentioned in any documents prepared immediately after the accident. This witness has stated that he knows injured but he did not take him to hospital. This witness has also not lodged any FIR. (PW-1) has not stated anything about Jhetu in his deposition. On above grounds, it is submitted involvement of offending vehicle in the accident is not proved. Hence, insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation.

3. Relying upon United India Insurance Company Limited vs. Salauddin Abdulkhadar Maniyar and Another, 2009 ACJ 524 (Karnataka) it is urged that where the Insurance Company has challenged involvement of offending vehicle in the accident and has disputed the liability, then cross objections for enhancement of award are not maintainable. The respondents/claimants should have separately filed the appeal. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and no enhanced amount is required to be paid to the respondents/claimants. On above grounds, it is urged that appeal be allowed and Insurance Company be exonerated from liability to pay the compensation.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents/claimants after relying upon Urmila Devi and Others vs. National Insurance Company Limited and Another, 2020 ACJ 771, Oriental Insurance Company Limited vs. Rajesh Devi and Others, 2018 (1) ACJ 301, U.P. State Road Transport Corporation vs. Janki Devi and Others, 1982 ACJ 429, National Insurance Company Limited vs. Shaikh Kuddush and Others, 2021 ACJ 1149, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited vs. T. Selvarani and Others, 2017 ACJ 396, submits that in the instant appeal, cross-objections are maintainable for enhancement of compensation.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents/claimants, after referring to Para Nos. 15 to 24 of impugned award, submits that after investigation into the present accident, police has filed the charge-sheet against the rider of offending vehicle who was riding the motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner and has caused the accident. Jhetu is a independent witness and there are no grounds to disbelieve him.

6. It is also urged that learned trial Court has rightly concluded that the accident has been caused by offending vehicle. It is also urged that in the case of motor accident, strict rules of evidence is not applicable and the case can be proved by preponderance of probability. In this connection, he has relied upon various citations such as Manful and Another vs. Mehmood and Others, 2003 (4) MPLJ 174 and Sneha Saularam Bankar and Others vs. Hanumant Vaman Pednekar and Another, 2016 ACJ 1976.

7. Learned counsel for the respondents/claimants after referring to Kusmi Devi vs. Mohd. Kasim and Another, 2023, ACJ 1658, Kishan Gopal and Another vs. Lala and Others, 2013 ACJ 2594 and Ratan and Another vs. Rakesh Jain and Another, 2014 ACJ 2308 submits that compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on lower side and the Tribunal ought to have been awarded minimum Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation to the claimants.

8. On above grounds, it is urged that appeal filed by appellant-Insurance Company be dismissed and