These appeals are directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 13.12.2013 passed in MVC.Nos.6052/2012 & 6351/2012 on the file of XXI Addl. CMM & Member MACT, Bengaluru.

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 12.09.2012, Kannappa @ Sathyanarayana and Shiva @ Shivashankar were proceeding as inmates in medium goods vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-52:5706 on NH-44, when the vehicle passed over flyover bridge, Pullur Village, Manopad Mandal, Mahabubnagar District, Andhra Pradesh, the driver of the same drove the vehicle at high speed in a rash and negligent manner, suddenly over took another vehicle, lost control over the same and dashed against unknown vehicle. Due to which, they sustained grievous injuries and Kannappa @ Sathyanarayana succumbed to the said injuries on 12.09.2012 in the hospital. They filed a claim petitions seeking compensation before the Tribunal. The Tribunal on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on record has awarded total compensation of Rs.10,04,000/-in MVC.No.6052/2012 and Rs.11,08,000/in MVC.No.6351/2012 together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit by respondent No.1. Being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded, the wife, daughters and son of deceased Kannappa @ Sathyanarayana filed MFA.No.2270/2014 and Shiva @ Shivashankar who sustained grievous injuries in a road traffic accident has filed MFA.No.2271/2014 and MFA.Nos.2218 and 2217 of 2014 are filed by the owner of the goods vehicle on the ground that the liability ought to have been fastened on the Insurance Company.

3. The claimant in MFA.No.2271/2014 is the injured who sustained injury in a road traffic accident, which took place on 12.09.2012. In the appeal memorandum, it is contended that the Tribunal has committed an error in taking the income at Rs.5,000/-per month, in spite of P.W.6 who is the owner has deposed before the Tribunal that he engaged the services of the claimant and was earning the salary of Rs.10,000/-per month. It is further contended that the Tribunal has failed to notice that the appellant now totally became disable and has to depend on others for day to day work and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is very meager under all the heads and also failed to appreciate the functional disability of the claimant who has suffered the amputation of right leg and also the injuries to both bones of the left leg. Hence, just and reasonable compensation has to be awarded by relooking into the materials on record.

4. MFA.No.2270/2014 is filed by the claimants on account of death of Kannappa @ Sathyanarayana and the Tribunal has committed an error in taking the income of the deceased at Rs.5,000/-per month and has not awarded just and reasonable compensation.

5. In both the above appeals, the claimants have also challenged the liability fastened on the insured and vehemently contended that the Tribunal ought to have fastened the liability on the insurer, since the policy issued by the insurer is a Package Policy. Ex.R1-Insurnace Policy clearly discloses that it is the Package Policy and not the Act Policy. Hence, the Tribunal has committed an error in fastening the liability on the insured and the same has to be fastened on the Insurance Company.

6. The learned counsel for the appellants/claimants in support of his contention has relied upon the decision of this Court in the case of M.V. Chowdappa Vs. Mohan Breweries & Distilleries Limited reported in 2005 ACJ 644 and brought to my notice the paragraph Nos.28 and 34 regarding not justifying in assessing the permanent disability.

7. The learned counsel for the appellant in his argument regarding liability is concerned has vehemently contended that the Tribunal has failed to take note of the fact that the deceased and the injured both accompanied the owner in order to transport the Ganesha Idol from Hyderabad to Hosur and erroneously come to the conclusion that the Insurance Company is not liable to