B. MANOHAR, J.

1. These appeals and cross-objection are filed by the United India Insurance Company as well as the claimants being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 03-04-2009 made in WCA Nos. 229 and 230 of 2001 passed by the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Sub Division-II, Bijapur (hereinafter referred to as 'the WCC for short).

2. MFA No. 31711/2009 and MFA No. 31712/2009 are filed by the United India Insurance Company, being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the WCC fastening the liability on them to compensate the claimants whereas the MFA Cross-Objection No. 1005/2010 is filed by the claimants being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation.

3. Since the common judgment and order passed by the WCC has been challenged in these appeals and cross-objections, both the appeals and cross-objection are taken up together and disposed of by this common judgment.

4. Claimants are the sons of deceased Lakshmi Bai and brother of deceased Akku Bai. They filed the claim petition contending that their mother Smt. Lakshmibai and their sister Akkubai were working as coolies in a lorry bearing registration No. AP-11/T-4737 belonging to the first respondent therein. As per the instructions of the owner of the vehicle, on 27-06-1994, the mother and sister of the claimants were proceeding in the offending lorry for the purpose of loading stones on Pune-Mumbai road, near Kangav village, due to the rash and negligent driving, the driver of the said lorry dashed against the stationed lorry. Due to the impact, the mother and sister of the claimants sustained grievous injuries, subsequently, they succumbed to injuries. In the claim petition, it was contended that the deceased were working as coolies and on that day, after loading stones, they were proceeding for construction of road at Phanavel. Due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry, the accident had occurred. Prior to the accident, both the deceased were earning Rs. 1,500/- p.m. and batta of Rs. 20/- per day to Laxmibai and Rs. 50/- per day to Akkubai. The claimants are the dependants of the deceased and sought for compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- each.

5. In pursuance of the notice issued by the WCC, owner of the vehicle remained unrepresented. On behalf of the Insurance Company, they entered appearance and filed written statement denying the entire averments made in the claim petition and disputed the relationship of master and servant between the deceased and the owner of the vehicle. Further, the deceased mother and daughter were travelling in a goods vehicle as unauthorised passengers. Hence, the Insurance Company is not liable to compensate the claimants and sought for dismissal of the claim petition.

6. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation framed the necessary issues.

7. The claimants in order to prove their case, the first claimant was examined as P.W. 1 and one of the eye-witnesses was examined as P.W. 2 and got marked the documents as Ex. P1 to Ex. P8. On behalf of the respondents, Mr. K.M. Manjunathaswamy, the Assistant Manager of the Insurance Company was examined as R.W. 1 and got marked the insurance policy as Ex. R1.

8. The WCC after considering the oral and documentary evidence let in by the parties and taking into consideration the charge sheet, spot panchanama and copy of the complaint held that the deceased died in the road traffic accident occurred on 27-6-1994, due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry bearing registration No. AP-11/T-4737. Claimants are the dependents of deceased Laxmibai. The accident occurred during the course and out of employment. Hence, the claimants are entitled for compensation. With regard to quantum of compensation is concerned, in MVC No. 230/2011, the WCC, taking the income of Laxmibai as Rs. 1,500/- deducting 50% thereof, applying the relevant factor of 197.06, awarded a sum of Rs. 1,47,795/- with interest at the rate o