JUDGMENT :

1. MFA No.95 of 2013 is filed by the widow and children of the deceased M. Jyotheshwar Reddy, seeking enhancement of compensation.

MFA No.709 of 2013 is filed by the Insurance Company, challenging the liability as well as the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

2. Both the appeals are directed against the judgment and award dated 09.10.2012 passed by the MACT, Bengaluru in MVC No.1747/2010, wherein the Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs.10,79,200/-along with interest at 6% per annum to the claimants for the death of M. Jyotheshwar Reddy in a road traffic accident.

3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the claimants and the learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company.

4. The brief facts of the case are that on 22.09.2003 at about 1.30 p.m., near Mirasipalle bus stop, Mirasipalle Village of Kadappa District, the deceased M. Jyotheshwar Reddy was traveling in a Tata 709 Van bearing registration No.MH04AG5501 towards Laxmipeta of Kadappa District, with a load of hens belonging to its owner, M/s. Suvera Hatcheries Private Limited, Nellor. The driver of the said van lost control over the vehicle and dashed against the oncoming lorry bearing registration No.AP24U8449. In the said accident, M. Jyotheshwar Reddy succumbed to the injuries while being shifted to the hospital for treatment.

5. The claimants being the wife and two minor children of the deceased filed a claim petition, praying to award a total compensation of Rs.15 Lakhs for the death of M. Jyotheshwar Reddy.

6. Before the Tribunal, the wife of the deceased got examined herself as PW1. Exs.P1 to P10 were marked through her evidence. The claim was resisted by the respondentInsurance Company. RW1 was examined and Exs.R1 to R5 were marked on behalf of the Insurance Company.

7. The Tribunal after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record, awarded a total compensation of Rs.10,79,200/-along with interest at 6% per annum under the following heads:

8. The Tribunal held that as on the date of accident, the Tata 709 van bearing registration No.MH04AG5501 had valid insurance coverage and the deceased M. Jyotheshwar Reddy was traveling in the said goods vehicle along with a load of hens belonging to his employer M/s. Suvera Hatcheries Private Limited, Nellor and that Respondent No.2 failed to prove that the deceased was traveling in the said goods vehicle as an unauthorized passenger at the time of accident and accordingly held both the respondents before the Tribunal are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation and directed the Insurance Company to deposit the said compensation amount.

9. Sri. C.R. Ravishankar, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company vehemently contended that the accident took place in the year 2003 and the claim petition has been filed on 22.03.2010 and therefore, there is an inordinate delay in filing the claim petition. The said delay could not have been condoned by the Tribunal and the petition ought to have been dismissed on the sole ground of delay. He would further contend that the deceased was a gratuitous passenger traveling in a goods vehicle.

Therefore, he is not covered under the policy. Hence, the Tribunal was not proper in saddling the liability on the Insurance Company to pay the compensation. It is his contention that the case of the claimants that the deceased was a vaccination supervisor and he was traveling in the vehicle along with the load of hens and therefore, he was authorized by the owner to travel in the said vehicle cannot be accepted, because, the said fact has not been e