ORDER

1. This common order shall govern disposal of M.A.No.2100/2013 & M.A.No.2155/2013 as both the appeals arise out of an award arising from the same accident.

2. M.A.No.2100/2013 has been filed by the insurance company seeking reduction of the compensation amount awarded by the tribunal/exoneration from the liability whereas M.A.No.2155/2013 has been filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Both the appeals arise out of the award dated 27.6.2013 passed by Ist Additional MACT, Dhar in claim case no.92/2009.

3. Brief facts of the case are that on 14.07.2009 at about 8.30 PM when the deceased Heeralal was going on his motorcycle bearing registration no.MP11-MA-4601 with due care and at normal speed, the respondent No.1 who was driving the offending vehicle bearing registration no.HR-55-H-8685 rashly and negligently came and hit the deceased due to which Heeralal sustained grievous injuries and died. The claimants who are the legal representatives of the deceased filed a claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation. The insurance company, driver and owner of the offending vehicle filed their written statement before the tribunal and denied all averments made in the claim petition. The Tribunal framed issues on the basis of pleadings made by the parties and recorded the evidence. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the evidence came on record, the tribunal has allowed the claim petition and awarded a compensation of Rs.4,25,000/- in favour of the claimants along with interest from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization.

4. The insurance company has filed the appeal (MA No.2100/2013) on the ground that the tribunal has erred in not considering that the driver of the offending vehicle was driving the vehicle without valid and effective driving license at the time of accident. The counsel for the appellant insurance company submits that it is evident from the record of the case that the driver of the offending vehicle had obtained the license from RTO, Jind on 9.10.1998 which was valid up to 15.8.2008 and after this period the same was renewed from RTO, Gurgaon which has issued this license for 3 years because there was transport endorsement on the license i.e. 14.11.2009 to 13.11.2012. He further submits that it is clear from this fact that on the date of the accident i.e on 14.7.2009 the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess license in respect of the said vehicle. He further submits that the tribunal has committed error in not relying upon the testimony of DW/1 Pawan Kumar Agrawal, officer of the insurance company who has proved the insurance policy and has also exhibited the abstracts obtained from the respective RTOs of Jind and Gurgaon. He, therefore, prayed for exoneration of the insurance company from its liability in absence of valid and effective driving license which is one of the reason for breach of the terms of the insurance policy.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents/claimants supported the impugned award in this regard and prayed for rejection of the appeal filed by the insurance company.

6. The appellants/claimants have filed the appeal MA No.2155/2013 on the ground that the compensation awarded by the tribunal is on the lower side. The tribunal has erred in granting meager amount under various heads while granting compensation. The tribunal has committed an error in not granting consortium in the light of the verdict of the apex court in the case of United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur & others (Civil Appeal No.2705 of 2020) arising out of SLP (Civil) No.28548/2014. The Tribunal has committed error in not granting future prospects in the light of the verdict of the Apex court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and others - 2017 ACJ 2700. Hence, prays for awarding just and proper amount of compensation in the case.

7. On the ot