Judgment Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. Present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 20-9-2001, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Udham Singh Nagar. 3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that petitioner Akbar Ali and Smt. Sabra Begum have filed a claim petition for grant of compensation on account of death of their son Sri Bakar Ali, who died in a motor vehicle accident on 1-12-2000 near village Baberpuri, District Udham Singh Nagar. The petitioner alleged that the deceased was riding motor cycle No. UP 22-5044 as pillion rider. The motor cycle was being driven by Sri Quamar Ali. The petitioners have alleged that the accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of motor cycle due to which it collided with a bullock cart. Sri Bakar Ali sustained grievous injuries in the accident. He was brought to Government Hospital, Bajpur from where he was referred to Government Hospital, Kashipur. Further he was admitted in a private nursing home where he died on 12-12-2000. The petitioners have claimed a compensation of Rs. 6,82,000/-. The Claim petition has been contested by opposite party no.2, the National Insurance Company. 4. On the pleadings of the parties the Claims Tribunal has framed as many as four issues. 5. The Claims Tribunal has held that from the evidence on record it is evident that no accident had taken place as alleged by the petitioner and actually the entire story of accident was concocted after the death of Bakar Ali in order to get compensation from the Insurance Company and accordingly the Claims Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition. 6. Feeling aggrieved the appellants have filed the present appeal. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. 8. A perusal of judgment and award passed by the Claims Tribunal shows that the learned Tribunal has placed much reliance on the report and statement of D.W.3 Chandra Pal Singh Tomar, who is surveyor of the Insurance Company. The petitioners have examined Quamar Ali as P.W.2, who was driving the motor cycle at the time of accident. He has categorically stated that the deceased Bakar Ali had sustained injuries in motor cycle accident. Akbar Ali P.W.1 has also stated that his son sustained injuries in the accident and he succumbed to the injuries. The petitioners have examined Quamar Ali as P.W.2, who was driving the motor cycle at the time of accident. He has categorically stated that the deceased Bakar Ali had sustained injuries in motor cycle accident. Akbar Ali P.W.1 has also stated that his son sustained injuries in the accident and he succumbed to the injuries. The petitioners have also filed documentary evidence in support of their assertion that the deceased had sustained injuries in motor cycle accident. The petitioners have filed medical certificate issued by the E.M.O. of PHC, Bazpur. The medical certificate was prepared on the date of accident i.e. 1-12-2000 at 6.35 PM and the doctor has mentioned in the certificate that the injuries were sustained from the wheel of Bailgadi. In the Panchayatnama prepared on 12-12-2000, it has clearly been mentioned that the death of Bakar Ali was caused due to the injuries sustained on 1-12-2000 in motor cycle accident. 9. I find that the Claims Tribunal has evaluated the evidence of the petitioners with a wrong angle and has placed reliance on the hearsay statement of the surveyor of insurance company. A narrow and hypertechnical view in the motor accident claims case could not justify the beneficent object contained in the provision of the Act. The procedure under the Act is efficacious, speedy and inexpensive. Where death or permanent disablement of any person has resulted from an accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle, the amount of compensation shall be payable under no fault scheme of Section 140 of the M.V. Act also. 10. The deceased had got treatment in various hospitals and the petitioners have filed medical certificate issued by the doctors of various hospitals. The Tribunal can very well examine the doctors of the hospitals where the deceased had undergone treatment and also the persons who signed the Panchayatnama as Court witnesses to prove as to whether accident by motor cycle, as stated by the petitioners, had taken place in which the deceased had sustained injuries. 11. The appeal is, therefore, allowed and the case is remanded to the Claims Tribunal to examine the witness of Panchayatnama as well as the doctors, who medically examined the deceased and thereafter to decide the case afresh in accordance with law. No order as to costs.