JUDGMENT :

This is an appeal against the judgment of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Nagpur in Claim Petition No. 1402/2004 dated 15-12-2011.

2. On 13-8-2004, deceased Sandeep Gupta who was an employee of Western Coalfields Limited (WCL) was going in Jeep No. MH-31-H-1297 from Nagpur towards Chandrapur. One offending truck bearing No. MH-34-A-47-47 came in high speed from opposite direction. Driver of said truck could not control it and gave dash to the jeep of deceased. Deceased Sandeep sustained severe injuries. He was admitted in the hospital. During treatment, he died on 1-9-2004. Police Station, Bhadrawati registered crime for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code against the truck driver. Legal representatives/claimants filed claim petition before the MACT, Nagpur against owner, driver and insurance companies.

3. After recording the evidence, the Tribunal come to the conclusion that driver of jeep and truck both were equally negligent for the accident and, therefore, both the owners, insurance companies of jeep and truck were held responsible for the payment of compensation. The respondent no. 1 (appellant herein) who was the owner of jeep was directed to pay compensation of Rs. 12,31,970/- after deducting the amount of Rs. 3,84,280/- paid by the respondent no. 1. The respondent nos. 2 and 3 i.e. owner and insurance company of the truck was directed to pay compensation of Rs. 16,16,250/.

4. The owner and insurance company not challenged the impugned judgment. Insurance company of the truck has deposited the amount of Rs. 16,16,250/- before the MACT. As per the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, that amount is withdrawn by the claimants.

5. Heard learned counsel Ms. Wanjari holding for Shri Anilkumar for the appellant. She has submitted that claimants have received the amount of compensation before the Commissioner, Workmen Compensation and, therefore, the claimants could not have filed claim petition against the respondent no. 1. Learned counsel has pointed out Section 8 of the Workmen's Compensation Act and Section 167 of the Motor Vehicle Act. Learned counsel has submitted that the claimants have received the amount of Rs. 3,84,280/- as a full and final settlement and, therefore, impugned award passed against the respondent no. 1 is illegal and liable to be quashed and set aside.

6. Learned counsel Ms. Pathade holding for Shri Mirache, learned counsel for the claimants/respondent nos. 1A to 1C has submitted that the claimants not claimed any amount of compensation before the Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation Act. As per Section 167 of the Motor Vehicle Act, two forums are given to claim the compensation by the employee. Learned counsel has submitted that as per Section 167 of the Motor Vehicle Act, there must be claim by the claimants either before the Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation Act or the forum available under Motor Vehicles Act. There was no claim by the claimants before the Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation Act but the claimants have approached to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal under Motor Vehicles Act.

7. Heard Mrs. Thete, learned counsel holding for Shri Shashikant Borkar, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5. She has submitted that WCL has already paid amount of compensation under Workmen's Compensation Act, therefore, WCL and Insurance company of Jeep i.e. National Insurance Company are not responsible to pay compensation.

8. Section 167 of the Motor Vehicle Act reads as under :

167. Option regarding claims for compensation in certain cases. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923) where the death of, or bodily injury to, any person gives rise to a claim for compensation under this Act and also under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, the person entitled to compensation may without prejudice to the provisions of Chapter X claim such compensation under either of those Act