(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the above named insurance company under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the award of compensation granted in favour of the claimants-respondents in Compensation Case No. 71 of 1990 by 3rd Addl. Dis trict Judge-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Singhbhum (West) Chaibasa.
(2.) The predecessor of the claimants was a coolie in the offending vehicle truck No. BHN 8540 and he was having his monthly income at Rs. 600/-. The truck in question met with an accident when the driver of the vehicle lost control over the same and it was overturned near village Nawada due to mechanical defects. The deceased sustained severe injuries and he died almost instantaneously at the spot itself. Learned court below held that the accident occurred due to negligence of the driver and as such held that the claimants are entitled to compensation. While assessing the compensation, dependency was calculated at Rs. 400/-per month and yearly dependency at Rs. 4,800/- and as the deceased was aged about 50 years, a multiplier of 10 was used and a total compensation of Rs. 48,000/- was awarded. The insurance company was asked to pay the amount as the vehicle was found to be insured with the appellant insurance company under a comprehensive policy.
(3.) The appeal has been preferred only on the ground that the deceased being an employee of the owner of the vehicle as coolie in the vehicle itself, compensation claimed under the Motor Vehicles Act is not maintainable.