The liability of insurers for compensation in case of an accident, including passenger liability, is established under S. 102 of the Motor Vehicles Act and S. 2 of the Policy.

( 1 ) THESE appeals arise out of judgment and award dated the 31st day of March, 1979 passed by the Claims Tribunal, Chitradurga, in MVC No. 3 of 1972.

( 2 ) THE brief facts giving raise to the present appeals are these : -. On 9-8-1971, one Siddalinganaika was proceeding to Hale Yalanadu in the Jeep belonging to the Vani Vilas Sugar Factory limited, Hiriyur, to attend the 'vaikuntha Samaradhana' in the house of one K. Seetharamiah the then Chairman of the Vani Vilas 'sugar Factory, Hiriyur. They were proceeding at the invitation of Seetharamiah. When the jeep left Hiriyur, the petitioner siddalinganaika was the only occupant in the jeep apart from the driver. When the jeep was proceeding, it met with an accident. A lorry bearing No. MYN. 3196 came from the opposite with high speed and dashed against the jeep. The first respondent in the petition was driving the lorry, while P. W. 1 Side Isaak was driving the jeep belonging to the Sugar, Factory. In the accident, Siddalinganaika as well as P. W. 6 Narayanappa sustained injuries. The injured persons were removed to the Hiriyur hospital and they were treated. Petitioner in MVC 3 of 1972 examined as P. W. 7 was further taken to Bangalore Hospital on the same day and he was admitted to St. Martha's Hospital. He was in the hospital for twenty-eight days. After his discharge, he attended the hospital for some more time. He was not fully cured though he took treatment by several doctors. The injured had sustained severe injuries and suffered deformity in his left arm and in right leg. His left hand was shortened by 3/4". He has prolonged treatment and suffered agony. He was disabled. He applied before the Tribunal for compensation claiming Rs. 1,30,000/from owners and insurers of both the vehicles. The tribunal appreciating the evidence on record held that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of both the vehicles and it apportioned the liability of 50 per cent on each vehicle driver and awarded compensation of Rand 61,970/- to the injured claimant. Aggrieved by the said judgment and award, the insurance company of the Lorry has instituted MFA 1000/79, Insurer of Jeep has instituted MFA 1258/79, owner of the jeep has instituted M. F. A. 1043/79 and claimant has instituted M. F. A. 1179/79 complaining that compensation awarded is not adequate.

( 3 ) IT may be noted that when the appeal of the claimant was pending, he died and his legal representatives are brought on record. It also appears that the owner of the lorry also died during the pendency of the proceeding before the tribunal. But there was no award made against him.

( 4 ) WE will first take up for consideration the appeal made by the claimant in M. F. A. No. 1179/79. He has no doubt made a grievance that the compensation awarded is not adequate. But the evidence on record discloses that he died during the pendency of this appeal. Along with him his claim for higher compensation also abates. The appeal is therefore liable to be dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs in appeal.

( 5 ) WE will next advert to the appeal made by the insurer of the lorry in M. F. A. No. 1000/79. The grievance of the Insurance company is that the owner of the vehicle died even during the pendency of the claim petition before the tribunal and as such, no award could be passed against the Insurance company.

( 6 ) THERE is no substance in the contention, so raised because S. 102, Motor Vehicles Act, states:

"notwithstanding anything contained in S. 306, Succession Act, 1925, the death of person in whose favour a certificate of insurance had been issued, if it occurs after the happening of an event which has given rise to a claim under the provisions of this Chapter, shall not be a bar to the survival of any cause of action arising out, of the said event against his estate or against the insurer. "

In this case, the claim petition was already filed before the Tribunal and Insurance company had issued the po