A driver with a valid light motor vehicle license is authorized to drive transport vehicles within that weight class without specific endorsement. Appellate courts must ensure just compensation under the Act, having the power to correct awards or enhance amounts even without a cross-appeal by the claimants.

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J. (Oral)

1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant-Insurance company against the award dated 25.03.2015 passed in a claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short, 'the Tribunal'), wherein the appellant-Insurance company was fastened with the liability to pay the compensation of Rs.22,05,428/- to the claimants along with interest @ 7.5 % per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till realization of the amount.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 25.10.2013 at about 6.00 PM, deceased Taraqqi Lal Kundra was going from his house to park in Sector 5, Panchkula on foot for a walk. He was being followed by his wife Sudarshan Kundra and his daughter Seema. After crossing Inderdhanush Editorial, when they were walking on the left side of the road and reached opposite to entrance of Park Sector 5, Panchkula, at that time a Mahindra Pick-up bearing registration No. CH-01-TA-4971 came at fast speed, in rash and negligent manner from the side of Hafed Office and Nik Bakers, which was being driven by respondent No.1 and struck against the deceased. As a result of this accident, deceased fell on the road and was dragged to a long distance. After causing the accident, the driver of Mahindra Pick-up stopped for a while and wife of deceased Sudarshan Kundra inquired his name and noted the number of Mahindra Pick-up. Thereafter, said person sped away from the spot of occurrence along with his vehicle. The deceased was immediately taken to General Hospital, Sector 6, Panchkula, from where, he was taken to PGI, Chandigarh on the same day. He was further shifted to Fortis Hospital, Mohali on 30.10.2013. Thereafter, he remained under medical treatment of General Hospital, Sector 6, Panchkula. However, he succumbed to the injuries on 26.01.2014. It is specifically alleged that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending Mahindra Pick-up No. CH-01-TA-4971 driven by respondent No.1 Rajan Kumar.

3. Upon notice of the claim petition, respondents therein appeared and contested the claim petition by denying the factum of accident/compensation.

4. From the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues:-

“1. Whether the accident dated 25.10.2013 resulting into the death of Taraqqi Lal Kundra had occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of vehicle bearing No. CH-01-TA-4971, if so, its effect ?OPP.

2. If issue No.1 is proved in favour of claimants, whether claimants are entitled for compensation, if so, how much and from whom ?OPP.

3. Whether the respondent No.1 was holding a valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident?OPR-2.

4. Whether there was valid and effective route permit of the vehicle in question at the time of accident ?OPR

5. Relief. ”

5. Thereafter, both the parties led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.

6. After taking into consideration the pleadings and the evidence on record, the learned Trib