IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Appeal Against Order No. 255 of 2005 Smt. Kalawati & another … Appellants Vs New India Insurance Company Ltd. & 2 others … Respondents Sri Sanjeev Singh, learned counsel for the appellants Sri M.K. Goyal, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act has been filed by the appellants against the judgment and award dated 31.03.2005 passed by M.A.C.T./District & Sessions Judge, Haridwar in M.A.C.P. No. 71 of 2001, Smt. Kalawati & another Vs New India Insurance Company & others whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 50,000/- in favour of the claimants. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the claimants are the parents of Yashveer Singh @ Jasveer Singh. At the time of accident he was 22 years of and used to earn Rs. 4,000/- per month. Therefore, the claimants filed the claim petition before the Tribunal concerned for Rs. 35,70,000/- as compensation. On 27.12.1999, the deceased was coming from Vaishno Devi to Haridwar in his Tata Sumo No. DL3CH/2713 along with his friends. When they reached on Bhogpur G.T. Road at about 10:00 p.m. the said vehicle met with an accident due to which, Yashveer Singh died at the spot. According to the claim petition, the deceased was the expert driver. The said accident took place due to fog. The claimants are the parents of the deceased. 2 3. The New India Insurance Company i.e. opposite parties No. 1 and 2 filed their joint written statement before the Tribunal concerned. It has been pleaded that the claim petition was filed by the claimants collision with the owner of the vehicle. The driver of the Tata Sumo No. DL3CH/2713 was not having the valid driving licence, valid R.C. and permit. The vehicle in question was purchased by Sri Nafe Singh from Paramjeet Singh. Paramjeet Singh has purchased the said vehicle from Suresh Mittal in whose name, the policy is running. The deceased was neither the employee of Paramjeet nor the employee of Nafe Singh, therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay any compensation. 4. Paramjeet Singh also contested the claim petition by filing his written statement before the Tribunal concerned. He has stated that the vehicle was insured upto 08.07.2000 with the New India Assurance Company Ltd., therefore, the Insurance Company was liable to pay compensation, if any. 5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal has framed relevant issues, which were discussed in great detail. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the entire evidence led by the parties, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 50,000/- in favour of the claimants vide judgment and order dated 31.03.2005. 6. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and award the appellants/claimants preferred this appeal for enhancement the amount of compensation. 7. Heard Sri Sanjeev Singh, learned counsel for the appellants, Sri M.K. Goyal, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 and perused the record. 3 8. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the Tribunal did not consider this point that the deceased was getting Rs. 4,000/- per month as salary. He has further submitted that the Tribunal also did not consider the age of the parents and decided the claim petition in a cursory manner. Learned counsel for the appellants has further contended that the claim petition was filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act while the Tribunal awarded the amount of compensation under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicle Act. 9. Perusal of the entire record, it has come to my notice that the accident took place due to fog. It is also not disputed that in the said accident Yashveer Singh died. Learned counsel for the appellants has pressed this appeal only on the point of quantum. It reveals from the record that at the time of the accident the vehicle in question was insured in the name of Parameet with New India Insurance Company Ltd. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly imposed the liability upon Insurance Company as well as Paramjeet. 10. As far as the amount of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal has rightly held that the accident took place due to fog. The accident took place in the month of December, it is well known fact that during that period foggy nights are usual, therefore, it cannot be said that the accident took place all of a sudden. Hence, the Tribunal decreed the claim petition in favour of the claimants under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act and awarded a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as compensation. 4 11. No other point has been pressed by the learned counsel for the appellants. The Tribunal has rightly decreed the claim petition under ‘no fault liability’. 12. I do not find any illegality in the impugned judgment and award. The Tribunal has rightly decreed the claim petition under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicle Act. I am in total agreement with the findings recorded by the Tribunal. 13. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The impugned judgment and award is hereby affirmed. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) 10.04.2008 ASWAL