ORDER : This appeal arises out of Award/Judgment dated 12.05.2016, passed by District Judge – cum – Motor Accident Claim Tribunal Court No. 1, Giridih in Title (M.V.) Suit No. 26/2012, whereby and where under appellant – Insurance Company has been directed to pay compensation of Rs.5,72,000/- along with interest @9% per annum from the date of institution till actual payment to the claimants. 2. Claim application was preferred by claimants for awarding compensation on account of motor vehicle accidental premature death of deceased Munna Ansari. According to Claim Application, on 11.01.2011, deceased Munna Ansari was coming to Giridih from Ranchi by Maa Kali Vijay Bus and when the said bus reached Beko Nawabandh, it rammed on a motorcycle, as a result of which bus turned turtle and deceased fell down from the bus and died on spot. First Information Report was lodged by the informant against driver of the offending vehicle claiming therein that accident took place due to rash, negligent and careless driving of driver of the bus. 3. After issuance of notice, parties appeared and contested the case and filed their written statement. However, the owner and driver of the Bus bearing no. JH 11 D 8791 denied any rash or negligent driving of the Bus or any accidental death. They further claimed that alleged bus was duly insured and hence liability, if any, goes to the Insurance Company. 4. The opposite party no. 3 – Insurance Company also appeared and filed written statement stating therein that there was no death due to alleged accident. The Insurance Company put the claimant to strict proof of the alleged accidental death. Insurance Company further took plea of contributory negligence as, according to them, accident took place due to negligent act of the deceased himself and as such, insurer of offending bus is liable to the extent of 50% only. 5. The learned Tribunal, after hearing the parties, framed following issues. (I) Whether the claimants have any valid cause of action in this case, if so, against whom? (II) Whether the deceased Late Munna Ansari died in motor vehicle accident arising out of use of the Bus No. JH 11D 8791 as its passenger with valid journey ticket? (III) Whether the vehicle being Bus No. JH 1D 8791 was validly insured with the O.P. ICICI Lombard Insurance Co. Ltd. at the relevant time? (II) Whether the deceased Late Munna Ansari died in motor vehicle accident arising out of use of the Bus No. JH 11D 8791 as its passenger with valid journey ticket? (III) Whether the vehicle being Bus No. JH 1D 8791 was validly insured with the O.P. ICICI Lombard Insurance Co. Ltd. at the relevant time? (IV) Whether the driver of the bus in question possessed valid and effective driving licence with endorsement of PSV badge on driving licence? (V) Whether there is violation of terms and conditions of policy of insurance, if any? (VI) Whether the owner of vehicle was possessing all valid and effective vehicular papers such as RC Book, Fitness Certificate, Route Permit, Tax Token etc.? (VII) Whether the compensation, as prayed for, is payable/awardable if so, to what extent and by whom? 6. After framing of issues, plaintiffs adduced witnesses whereas defendants have not examined a single witness in support of their respective contention. The documents produced by the plaintiff have also been marked and exhibited with the records. 7. After examining records of the case, learned Tribunal discussed the issues in details and claim application filed by the claimant has been allowed on contest against opposite party – Insurance Company and the Insurance Company has been directed to pay compensation amount to the tune of Rs.5,72,000/- with interest @9% per annum from the date of institution till its realisation. 8. Mr. Bibhash Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant – Insurance Company has assailed the impugned Judgment mainly on the ground that the same suffers from illegality and infirmity. Learned counsel submits that alleged accident never took place and entire story has been concocted to get compensation. The claimants and the police authorities are hand in gloves in plotting the story of fake accidental death. Neither such accident ever took place nor death has ever occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the alleged vehicle in question. Learned counsel further submits that even if such accident had taken place, the claimants could not bring on record anything to show that Munna Ansari died due to alleged accident. Learned counsel further submits that even if accident had taken place, the quantum of compensation should have been on the lower side and being contributory, the Insurance Company should have been saddled with the liability to the extent of half of the amount of compensation. 9. Learned counsel further submits that even if accident had taken place, the quantum of compensation should have been on the lower side and being contributory, the Insurance Company should have been saddled with the liability to the extent of half of the amount of compensation. 9. Mr. Yogesh Modi, learned counsel appears on behalf of the owner and driver of the offending vehicle. Learned counsel denies any accident and further submits that it is a false and concocted story plotted by the claimants to get compensation. Learned counsel further denied any rash or negligent driving of the alleged vehicle in question. 10. Nobody appears on behalf of the claimants. 11. I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the records. From perusal of documents on record, evidences led as well as findings of the learned Tribunal, I find that arguments advanced by learned counsel appearing for the appellant – Insurance Company is misconceived and off the record. It has clearly been held in the impugned Award that Para-30, 31, 35, 36 and 50 of the Original Case Diary of Bagodar P.S. Case No. 5/11 clearly reflects that the Investigating Officer of the Case had come to know that in the alleged accident, Munna Ansari died. The grounds raised by the Insurance Company that nothing had been brought on record to prove the accident is thus not sustainable and hence rejected. When accidental death of Munna Ansari has been proved, the Insurance Company cannot deny the claims raised by the claimants. No interference is warranted and this appeal is fit to be dismissed. 12. In the facts and circumstances mentioned hereinabove, this appeal is dismissed. The appellant/Insurance Company is directed to satisfy the Award within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and in terms and conditions mentioned in the Award. 13. Appeal is dismissed. 14. Let the lower court record, if any, be returned to the court concerned.