As per case facts, the deceased died in a road accident caused by the rash and negligent driving of the respondent's uninsured vehicle. The Tribunal dismissed the claim petition, stating ... the accident was not due to the respondent's negligence. The appeal challenged this finding, arguing the Tribunal misread evidence and the respondent's false implication defense was unsustainable, also noting that the deceased's alleged alcohol consumption was beyond pleadings. The question arose whether the Tribunal's decision on negligence was correct and if the claimants deserved compensation. Finally, the High Court found the Tribunal's decision perverse, establishing the respondent's negligence and vehicle involvement. It set aside the impugned award, holding the respondent liable to pay compensation to the claimants, including for future prospects and various forms of consortium, with interest, distributed among the legal heirs.