ORDER
S.C. Mohapatra, J.
1. Insurer is
appellant in this appeal under Section 178 of
the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
2. On 23-10-1989 Maruti Van No. DDV 467 dashed against a tree as a result of which Murari Singh, an occupant of the Car sustained fatal injuries and expired. Murari was employed as driver of the Car. Claimants, who are widow and minor son of the deceased filed application for compensation.
3. Insurer contested the claim on the ground that driver of the Vehicle having himself been negligent, claim by dependants under the Act is not sustainable. Added to it insurer asserted that claim is excessive and claimants are entitled in the maximum to compensation as provided under the Workmen’s Compensation Act.
4. Tribunal on appreciation of materials on record held that dependants are entitled to compensation under the Act and awarded compensation of Rs. 1,85,000/-. This is grievance of appellant.
5. When the appeal was listed for admission, notice of admission was issued where it was indicated that appeal may be finally disposed of at the time of admission. Pursuant to notice claimant respondents have entered appearance and appeal was listed for admission.
6. Although records of the tribunal have
not been received, both parties agreed that they have copies of the relevant documents and appeal can be heard and finally disposed of on that basis. Accordingly we have admitted the appeal and heard the same on merits.
7. Learned counsel for insurer appellant submitted that- as per the terms of the policy insurer is liable for injury to third parties. Where driver himself being negligent, there Was accident and he sustained fatal injuries compensation, claim under the Act is not entertainable. Learned counsel for claimant respondents on the other hand submitted that owner of the Vehicle was driving the van and driver was accompanying him as occupant in the vehicle. As such claim under the Act is entertainable.
8. If materials would have disclosed that deceased was driving the vehicle, submission of learned counsel for insurer would have force and we would have directed claimants to approach the Commissioner under the Workman’s Compansation Act as driver for remuneration is a workmen and dependents are entitled to compensation even if he was negligent which resulted in the accident. In this case, however, there are materials to conclude that owner of the vehicle was driving and driver was an occupant though in course of and arising out of his duty. Accordingly submission of learned counsel for insurer has no force.
9. Insurer is liable to compensate a workman driver to the extent provided under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. It comes to Rs. 1,27,074/-. Otherwise also under the Act just compensation would be near about the said amount. Accordingly, we modify the award and direct that insurer shall pay Rs. 1,27,074 as compensation to claimants. Claimants are entitled to interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the aforesaid amount from the date of application till the date of payment. Rate of 10% interest is now fixed by Reserve Bank of India on a long term fixed deposit. Accordingly, claimants should not be allowed higher rate of interest.
10. Claimants are widow and minor. They are treated to be members of weaker
section of the society. Courts and Tribunal are to protect their interest so that compensation payable to them is best utilised for their benefit and there is no chance of third person depriving them of the compensation or portion out of it. Their interest can be best protected in case the compensation amount with interest payable to them is directed to be invested in fixed deposit in their names jointly in a nationalised Bank or rural Bank nearer to their residence so that they receive the annual interest regularly to maintain themselves. We cannot forget that from the date of acident they must have spent amount for their maintenance. They must have also incurred expenses for this litigation. They will have to pay the fee on the claim amount taking all these factors into consideration we direct that Rs. 1,50,000/- (One lakh fifty thousand rupees) shall be invested in fixed deposit and balance shall be paid in cash. Insurer is directed to deposit the amounts separately with the Tribunal, who shall get the amount invested in fixed deposit in names of the claimants jointly with instruction to the Bank that the fixed deposit shall not be incumbered in any manner. In case claimants are in urgent need of money they shall move the tribunal for release of a portion as would be adjudicated by him to be appropriate to meet the need.
11. In result, appeal is allowed in part. There shall be no order as to costs.
12. Appeal allowed.