(1.) THE respondent No. 1 is the widow of deceased Sk. Wazir and the respondents 2 to 6 are their children. The respondent No. 6 is the mother of the deceased. All these respondents were exclusively depending on the deceased. The deceased was an employee of the appellant-original N.A. No. 1 as his driver and was having a driver's licence. He was in the regular employment of the appellant for five months preceding his death. The appellant was paying him Rs. 225/- p.m. as wages. The appellant was doing the business of operating trucks. On 17-9-1973 the deceased was on duty of goods truck MHV-1975 owned by the appellant. This truck met with an accident at Kamareddi in Andhra Pradesh. The deceased had sustained injuries in that accident and he died as a result of those injuries in the accident arising out of and in the course of employment of the appellant.
(2.) THE respondents 1 to 6 claiming to be the dependents of the deceased filed an application for compensation under the provisions of Workmen's Compensation Act against the appellant-original N.A. No. 1 who being the employer of the deceased was liable to pay Rs. 8000/- to the respondents 1 to 6 under the provisions of the Act. They also joined the respondent No. 7 as N.A. No. 2 in original application as they learnt that the said truck was insured with it under a comprehensive risk.
(3.) THE learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation framed necessary issues in view of the pleas of the parties. The respondents 1 to 6 examined Kubrabi as A.W. t, Sk. Hasan as A.W. 2. The appellant examined himself. The respondent 7 did not examine any witness. After appreciating both oral and documentary evidence on record, the learned Commissioner held that the deceased was receiving Rs. 160/- p.m. as wages as a goods truck driver from the appellant; the deceased died as a result of injuries sustained in the accident arising out of and in the course of his employment as employee of the appellant; the respondents 1 to 6 being dependants of the deceased are entitled to get compensation of Rs. 7000/- under the Workmen's Compensation Act; and that no order directing the respondent No. 7 to pay the amount of compensation to the respondent 1 to 6 can be made in these proceedings vide order dt. 11-6-1976. This order is challenged in this appeal by the appellant the original N.A. No. 1 before the Commissioner.