JUDGMENT 1. I.A. No. 738 of 2019, an application under section 5 of Limitation Act, is taken up, considered and allowed for the reasons mentioned therein. The delay of 42 days in filing this appeal is hereby condoned. Present miscellaneous appeal has been filed assailing the award dated 29.9.2018 passed by First Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior in Claim Case No.255/2017. 2. The facts in brief to decide the appeal are that present appellant / claimant filed a claim petition before learned claims tribunal for grant of compensation on account of injuries suffered by him in a motor accident occurred on 16.2.2016 involving loading dumper bearing registration No. MP07 GA 2675. 3. Respondents No. 1 and 2 – Driver and Owner of the offending vehicle filed their written statement and denied the allegations made in the claim petition. 4. Respondent No. 3 – Insurance Company filed its written statement and denied the averments made in the claim petition stating therein that the alleged accident occurred due to negligence of the injured and at the time of accident, the offending vehicle was being plied in violation of policy terms and conditions, therefore, insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation. 5. Learned claims tribunal framed issues and after hearing both the parties on merits and recording their evidence partly allowed the claim petition awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.17,500/- which was directed to be paid by the respondents jointly and severely. 6. The grounds taken in the appeal are that the learned Tribunal has wrongly held that the accident was on account of contributory negligence of injured without appreciating the evidence on record. Learned counsel for the appellant / claimant argued that there is no evidence on record that the accident occurred due to negligence of injured while she was crossing the road. All the documentary as well as oral evidence proved that the injured was standing near a Tiraha waiting for arrival of the bus when the accident occurred, therefore, the above finding be set aside. The further argument is that in view of the injury of victim, the amount of compensation is on lesser side and it may be enhanced appropriately. 7. The further argument is that in view of the injury of victim, the amount of compensation is on lesser side and it may be enhanced appropriately. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 insurance company argued that learned trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence and found that the accident was the result of contributory negligence of the injured / claimant, therefore, he prays for dismissal of the appeal. 8. Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the available record. 9. The claimant examined herself alongwith Navalkishore Gupta (PW2), record keeper of J.A. Hospital, Gwalior before the learned Tribunal. The claimant in her Court statement stated that at the time of accident she was waiting for arrival of bus on Tiraha when the driver of offending vehicle by driving the vehicle rashly and negligently hit her. The above statement is supported by the documents Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-12 pertaining to the charge-sheet filed in respect to this accident. The above documents also reveal that the injured was standing on a Tiraha waiting for the bus to come when the driver of offending vehicle hit her while driving the vehicle rashly and negligently. The driver of the vehicle has not appeared before the Tribunal to contradict the pleadings or evidence. 10. The Insurance Company has also not examined any eye-witness to contradict the above version of the claimant. The learned Tribunal only on the basis of spot map held that the accident was the result of contributory negligence of claimant without any evidence in this respect. The mere fact that the accident occurred in the middle of road doesn't mean that the accident is on account of contributory negligence because every person has a right to cross the road. 11. The apex Court in the case of Kusum Lata and Ors. v. Satbir and Ors.; 2011 ACJ 926 has held that in a case relating to motor accident claims, the claimants are not required to prove the case as it is required to be done in a criminal trial. The claimants were merely to establish their case on the touchstone of preponderance of probability. 12. Therefore, without any evidence in respect to contributory negligence, the finding of learned Tribunal in respect to contributory negligence is found to be erroneous and consequently, same is hereby set aside. 13. The claimants were merely to establish their case on the touchstone of preponderance of probability. 12. Therefore, without any evidence in respect to contributory negligence, the finding of learned Tribunal in respect to contributory negligence is found to be erroneous and consequently, same is hereby set aside. 13. So far as compensation in respect to injury caused to claimant is concerned, learned claims tribunal has assessed the total compensation amount to be Rs.33,000/- before deducting the 50% amount towards contributory negligence, however, looking to the nature of injury sustained by the claimant as well as the the period she remained admitted in the hospital, the amount of Rs.37,500/- in lump sum is found to be just and proper compensation. The tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.17,500/- to the claimant. The enhanced compensation amount comes to Rs.20,000/- (Rs.37,500 – 17,500). The enhanced amount of compensation i.e. Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand only) shall carry interest as awarded by learned claims tribunal from the date of claim application till realization. The enhanced amount of compensation shall be payable to the claimant within a period of 12 weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Rest of the award passed by learned claims tribunal shall remain intact. 14. Present miscellaneous appeal is hereby disposed of in above terms.