JUDGMENT Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. (Oral) This appeal U/S 173 of Motor Vehicles Act 1988 has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 27-10-2007 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Addl. District Judge/2nd F.T.C. Dehradun, dismissing the claim petition filed U/S 163-A of the Motor Vehicle Act 1988. 2. Brief fact of the case are that on 9-12-2003 at about 7-30 p.m. Rakesh was travelling in Tata 407 UA-07/F-2401 on Ghanshali Motor Marg. The vehicle met with an accident due to rash and negligence of its driver and it fell down in the deep ditch of 300 meters due to which deceased sustained grievous injuries and during his treatment he succumbed to the injuries. The deceased at the time of accident was 34 years of age and his monthly income was Rs. 5,000/- from agricultural work. The claimant filed claim petition for compensation. 3. The Opposite Party No.2 United Insurance Company filed written statement and denied the averments made in the claim petition. It was alleged that the driver was not having valid driving license and the vehicle was being driven against the terms of insurance policy. 4. The tribunal framed necessary issues in the claim petition. The claimant produced P.W.1 Ram Singh, P.W.2 Sundar Singh in oral evidence and also filed copies of registration of vehicle, driving license. 5. The tribunal after considering the evidence on record, dismissed the claim petition. 6 Feeling aggrieved this appeal has been preferred by the claimant. 7. The learned Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition mainly on the ground that the claim petition filed U/S 163-A of the Act is not maintainable and this finding is a perverse finding. 8. Under Section 163-A of the Act special provisions as to payment of compensation on structured formula basis has been made. The claimant may chose either to claim compensation by filing petition U/S 166 of the Act or U/S 163-A I.PC and the claimant filed the application U/s 163-A of the Act. Under sub-section (2) of Section 163-A of the Act the claimant shall not be required to plead or establish that the death or permanent disablement in respect of which the claim has been made was due to any wrongful act or neglect or default of the owner of the vehicle or vehicles concerned or of any other person. Under sub-section (2) of Section 163-A of the Act the claimant shall not be required to plead or establish that the death or permanent disablement in respect of which the claim has been made was due to any wrongful act or neglect or default of the owner of the vehicle or vehicles concerned or of any other person. In the case at hand though the claimant was not required to prove the rash and negligence of the driver. However, death of Rakesh in the incident was fully proved. P.W.2 Sunder Singh has proved that Rakesh had died in the accident due to the rash and negligence of the driver. Copy of driving license as well as insurance policy have been filed on record and these documents were valid at the time of accident. 9. The deceased was owner of the ill-fating vehicle and he had paid a premium of Rs. 100/- and his risk was covered only upto Rs. 2,00,000/-. Therefore, the claimant is entitled to get a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- in lieu of death of her father in the accident. The claimant is also entitled to get a sum of Rs. 2,000/- towards funeral expenses. In this way the total compensation to be awarded to the claimant comes to Rs. 2,02,000/-. The claimant shall also be entitled to get interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of actual payment. 10. The appeal is partly allowed and the impugned judgment and award is set aside. The claimant is awarded a sum of Rs. 2,02,000/- as compensation payable by United Indian Insurance Company along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till the date of actual payment. 11. Accordingly the appeal stands partly allowed.