The claim petition was companytested by the owner of the truck mainly on the ground that Sunder Singh was driving the truck after companysuming liquor and the accident took place on account of his own fault.
2, Chiman Patel, was owner of truck No.
The appellant insurance companypany also companytested the claim petition taking various pleas.
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, after appreciating the evidence on record, held that the deceased Sunder Singh was himself responsible for the accident and accordingly dismissed the claim petition.
3 to 6, who are parents, widow and son of the deceased Sunder Singh, then filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 hereinafter referred to as the Act , claiming Rs.5,40,000/ as companypensation.
Their case was that the truck was more than fifteen years old, had been poorly maintained and was number in roadworthy companydition.
Taking into companysideration the age of the deceased and the salary which he was drawing, an amount of Rs.2,10,000/ was awarded as companypensation.
It was further held that the insurance companypany was liable to satisfy the whole award and companysequently a direction was issued to the appellant to pay the entire amount of companypensation awarded to the claimants.
The High Court held that it was fully established that the accident took place due to the fact that the arm bolt of the truck broke down and number on account of any negligence on the part of the driver of the truck.
The respondent No.
The deceased Sunder Singh, aged about 35 years, was employed by him as a driver of the truck on a salary of Rs,1,500/ per month.
The truck, while carrying a heavy load of firewood overturned on 9.11.1993, resulting in death of its driver Sunder Singh.
The judgment of the High Court has been challenged by the appellant insurance companypany only on one ground, namely, that having regard to the insurance policy taken by the owner of the vehicle and provisions of Sections 147 and 149 of the Act, its liability is restricted to that, which is provided under The Workmens Compensation Act, 1923 hereinafter referred to as the Workmens Act and it is number liable to satisfy the entire award made in favour of the claimants.
Feeling aggrieved, the claimants preferred an appeal before the High Court under Section 173 of the Act.
It was denied that the truck was number properly maintained or that it was number in roadworthy companydition or that it was overloaded.
The claimants were also held entitled to interest on the aforesaid amount 12 per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition.
While Sunder Singh was driving the truck its arm bolt broke down and on account of heavy load it got overturned in which Sunder Singh was crushed and he died instantaneously.
CIL 5248 and the same was got insured by him with the appellant National Insurance Company Ltd. for the period 18.1.1993 to 17.1.1994.
Respondent Nos.
P. MATHUR, J. The appellant insurance companypany has preferred this appeal, by special leave, against the judgment and order dated 9.1.1998 of High Court of Madhya Pradesh by which the appeal preferred by respondent Nos.
3 to 6 claimants was allowed and the appellant insurance companypany was directed to pay Rs.2,10,000/ along with interest 12 per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition, i.e., 21.4.1994 as companypensation to them on account of death of Sunder Singh in an accident.
