This appeal arises under Section 30 of the Workmens Compensation Act (for short the W.C. Act). The 1st respondent was employed as a Driver with the 2nd respondent to work on a vehicle bearing No.AP-02-U-5269. The vehicle is insured with the appellant. On 30-5-2004, the 1st respondent was on duty to drive the vehicle from Madanapalli to Pulivendla, and on the way, it dashed a tree, and he received certain injuries. He is said to have been treated at various hospitals. He filed W.C. Case No.2 of 2005 before the Commissioner for Workmens Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Ananthapur, (for short the Commissioner), claiming a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation. He pleaded that he is unable to work normally, due to the permanent disability suffered by him.

2. The 2nd respondent remained ex parte. The claim of the 1st respondent was opposed by the appellant herein. It was pleaded that the policy does not cover the liability towards the Driver, since the stipulated premium was not paid. It was also urged that the claim made by the 1st respondent is exorbitant and cannot be entertained.

3. On behalf of the 1st respondent A. Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A-1 to A-5