M. P. CHINNAPPA, J.

( 1 ) THESE appeals are preferred by the insurance companies being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 5-3-1990 passed in m. v. c. No. 71 of 1987 and the judgment and award dated 24-11-1988 passed in m. v. c. No. 165 of 1987 by the motor accidents claims tribunal, allowing partly the claim petitions for compensation of the petitioners.

( 2 ) THE facts leading to these appeals are that on 31-8-86 at about 10. 30 p. m. one k. n. thipperudraiah and m. r. sathyamurthy who are the employees of Karnataka soap and detergent limited which comes under the employees state insurance corporation were travelling in a van bearing No. Car 3865 belonging to the said employer. When the van reached near the government junior college (ammani college) at chowdaiah road, bus bearing No. Caa 918 belonging to Karnataka government tourist development corporation collided with the van in which these petitioners were travelling, as a result of which these persons sustained multiple grievous injuries including compound fractures. Therefore, they lodged claim petitions under Section 110-a of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation against the Karnataka soap and detergent limited, Karnataka government insurance department (insurer of van car 3865), Karnataka state tourist development corporation (owner of the bus caa 918), united India insurance company limited (insurer of the bus caa 918) and k. l. venkata krishna alias krishna (driver of bus caa 918 ).

( 3 ) AFTER enquiry, the tribunal allowed both m. v. c. nos. 71 of 1987 and 165 of 1987. In m. v. c. No. 165 of 1987 filed by thipperudraiah, the tribunal has held that he is entitled for a compensation of Rs. 33,000/- with interest thereon at 9% p. a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation from the respondents 1 to 5 and as far as respondents 2 and 4 are concerned, each is directed to pay 50% of the compensation in favour of the petitioner.

( 4 ) IN m. v. c. No. 71 of 1987 which was filed by m. r. sathya murthy the tribunal has held that the petitioner therein was entitled to Rs. 35,992/- with interest at 9% p. a. and directed respondents 1 to 4 therein to jointly and severally pay the amount. Further respondent 2 and 4 were directed to pay the compensation amount to the extent of 50% each with interest. These orders have been assailed in these appeals.

( 5 ) AS against the award passed in m. v. c. No. 71 of 1987 i. e. in favour of sathya murthy the k. g. i. d. preferred an appeal in m. f. a. No. 1338 of 1990 and in m. f. a. No. 416 of 1996 the united India insurance company also questioned that award.

( 6 ) IN m. f. a. No. 715 of 1989 the united India insurance company has questioned the award of compensation in favour of k. n. thipperudraiah in m. v. c. No. 165 of 1987. It may be mentioned here that neither the owner nor the driver of the bus caa 918 has filed any appeal. Similarly, the employer of these claimants has also not preferred any appeal. Only the insurance companies have preferred these appeals as stated earlier.

( 7 ) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.

( 8 ) THE learned advocates appearing for the appellants have vehemently argued that the claimants viz. Sathya murthy and also thipperudraiah being the employees of the Karnataka soap and detergent limited factory are covered under the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short 'the e. s. i. act' ). They have availed e. s. i. facilities from the factory. Therefore, they are not entitled to file applications before the tribunal in view of the bar contained under sections 53 and 61 of the e. s. i. act. On that ground they submitted that the tribunal should have dismissed their applications.

( 9 ) THE advocates appearing for the claimants however submitted that they are entitled for the compensation payable to them due to the tortious liability of the third party, notwithstanding the fact that they are covered under the e. s. i. act.

( 10 ) ADMITTEDLY these two claim

Click Here to Read the rest of this document