This appeal is by the Insurer challenging the relationship of employer and employee on the ground that the claimant is none other than the son of the owner of the vehicle in question and that it is a vehicle owned under the family ownership.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant relies upon the decision rendered in GOTTUMUKKALA APPALA NARASIMHA RAJU & OTHERS VS. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD AND ANOTHER reported in 2007 ACJ 1025 wherein the Apex Court observed that the owner of the vehicle joined hands with the claimant for laying a claim against the Insurance Company and, dismissed the claim petition.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the claimant, interaliarelied upon the decision rendered by this Court in ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD Vs. HANUMANT AND ANOTHER reported in 2006 ACJ 251 wherein it was held that the jural relationship of employer and employee exists between the claimant and the owner of the vehicle who is none other than the father of the driver of the jeep, which was involved in the accident.

4. In the case on hand, what is not in dispute is that the claimant is the driver of the tractor, who sustained injuries in the accident that occurred on 14.06.2005, while