The main legal point established is the limitation of the Insurance Company's liability to Rs. 50,000 under Section 95 (2) (b) (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is presented by the United India Insurance Company against the award made by the District Judge and Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mandya in the claim petition presented under Section 110a of the Motor Vehicles Act ('the Act' for short ). Cross-objections is filed by the Taluk Agricultural Producers Marketing Co-operative Society represented by its Secretary who was respondent-1 in the claim petition.

( 2 ) THE facts of the case in brief are as follow:

On 14th May, 1980 a lorry bearing registration No. MYN 3824 belonging to the Society was proceeding towards Bangalore on Mysore-Bangalore road. A car bearing registration No. MSW 19 driven by the petitioner-claimant was proceeding towards Mysore. The accident occurred when the vehicles crossed at K. Settihalli at about 4-30 P. M. The car collided with the hind portion of the lorry as a result of which there was a damage to the car and injury to the driver. The injured owner-driver of the car presented a claim petition claiming compensation of Rs. 2,82,000/ -.

( 3 ) THE two main issues for consideration before the Tribunal were:

(1) Whether the accident occurred solely on account of the negligence of the driver of the lorry belonging to the Society? and (2) What is the quantum of compensation to be awarded to the claimant?

( 4 ) ON the first point, on the basis of the evidence on record, the Tribunal recorded a finding that there was contributory negligence on the part of the claimant also and the proportion of negligence between the driver of the lorry and the claimant who was driving the car was 75:25. On the question of compensation, having regard to the injuries suffered by the claimant, the tribunal quantified the compensation at Rs. 1,18,000/ -. After making an allowance to the extent of 25%, out of If, in view of the contributory negligence on the part of the claimant, a compensation of Rs. 88,500/-was awarded to the claimant. As regards the liability of the owner of the lorry and the Insurance Company, the Tribunal held both were jointly and severally liable to pay the entire amount of compensation awarded.

( 5 ) THE Insurance Company is in appeal before us contending that the 3rd party risk covered by the policy issued by the appellant-company was limited to Rs. 50,000/- In view of Section 95 (2) (b) (1) of the Act. The learned Counsel for the respondents contend that no such plea was taken by the Insurance Company before the Tribunal. Learned Counsel for the appellant does not dispute that there was omission on the part of the appellant-company to take such a specific plea based on Section 95 of the Act and he also does not dispute that the Office copy of the Insurance policy was not produced. However, he has made an application in this appeal seeking permission of the Court to produce office copy of the policy and has also sought our permission to raise the plea as it is based upon the statutory provision. As the question is purely a question of law based on Section 95 of the Act and also on the basis of the office copy of the policy which has been produced before us, the genuineness of which is beyond reproach, we have permitted the appellant to produce it as an additional evidence and also to urge an additional plea to the effect that the liability of the appellant Insurance Company was limited to Rs. 50,000/ -. Section 95 (2) (b) (1) expressly provides that in respect of persons other than the passengers in respect of goods vehicle, the liability is limited to Rs. 50,000/ -. This liability can be increased only by paying additional premium and getting extra coverage. The learned Counsel pointed out that no extra premium was paid for covering extra risk in respect of 3rd parties. As no additional premium was paid and no extra coverage for covering the risk in respect of 3rd parties had been taken, the restriction provided under Section 95 (2) (b) (1) of the Act has to prevail and therefore the liability of the Insurance Company has