Saxena, J. 1. This appeal is preferred by the driver of the vehicle involved in accident under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 against an Award dated 26th October 2005 in Claim Case No. 3/2001 passed by the Additional Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Mungaoli, district Guna (M.P.) directing thereby both the driver and the owner of the offending vehicle to pay compensation to the claimants.

2. The facts, in short, are that on 12th December 2000, deceased Ram Singh along with the appellant and other labourers was going on a tractor bearing registration No. MKH 8700 attached with a trolley for loading the send (Muram). It is alleged that after the trailer was being loaded with muram from the quarry, the driver took the tractor in a reverse position, consequently, the deceased Ram Singh who was standing nearby the trolley fell down in a quarry and a huge quantity of muram had collapsed from the quarry due to which he was pressed and seriously injured. The incident was reported to the police on which an F.I.R. was lodged and crime was registered against the driver. After investigation, charge sheet was filed for commission of offence punishable under section 304A of I.P.C. read with sections 3/181, 39/152-A, 146/196 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the criminal Court. In a claim petition filed by the claimants of the deceased/labour, the tribunal concluded that the accident was as a result of rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver, hence, the owner as well as driver of the vehicle both were directed to pay compensation amount in the sum of Rs. 2,58,000/- in all heads along with interest @ 6 % per annum from the date of filing of claim within a period of one month, failing which the amount was directed to be paid alongwith penal interest @ 12%.Being aggrieved, the appellant has come to this Court with the present appeal.

3. The contention put forth by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the conclusion of the Tribunal that the accident was the result of the negligent act on the part of the driver was not in consonance with the facts as came out from the evidence. It is further submitted that the income of the deceased was determined at higher side and therefore the amount awarded was not properly assessed. On this basis, it is prayed that by allowing the appeal, the award passed against the appellant may be set aside and the appellant may be absolved from the liability of satisfying the damages awarded to the claimants.

4. On the other hand, the submissions of the respondents No. 1 to 7 claimants of the deceased are that the Tribunal on the basis of evidence rightly held that the accident occurred due to negligence on the part of the driver as a result the trolley pushed the deceased Ram Singh down into a quarry who received serious injuries and died during treatment. On the report received from hospital, a Marg was lodged and after inquiry, the crime was registered. After investigation, the charge-sheet was filed. It is submitted that in such circumstances, the Tribunal passed the award in accordance with the evidence on record and rightly compensated the claimants. Hence, it is prayed that the appeal may be dismissed

5. The question for consideration in this appeal is whether the claimants have established their case by leading cogent evidence on record that the deceased died on account of negligence on the part of the driver which fact was rightly found to be proved by the Tribunal and for which proper compensation was awarded to them ?

6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Also perused the evidence on record and the law applicable to the present case.

7. On perusal of the record of the learned Tribunal, it appears that Raj Kumar lodged report in police station Mungaoli that on 12th December 2000, he and other labourers of the village Bhatpura including Ram Singh were going to load Muram in a trolley from the quarry. It is stated that aft