S.B.Sinha, J.

1. These three miscellaneous appeals involving common questions of fact and law were, with the consent of the parties, heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Misc. Appeal No. 7 of 1981 (R) arises out of a judgment and award passed in M.J.C. No. 72 of 1980, whereas Misc. Appeal No. 8 of 1981 (R) arises out of MJ.C. No. 54 of 1980. The aforementioned two applications were heard and disposed of together by Mr. AP. Sinha, Judicial Commissioner-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, by his judgment dated 14th October, 1980.

3. So far as Misc. Appeal No. 18 of 1984 (R) is concerned, the same arises out of the judgment and order dated 6.12.1983 passed by Mr. Om Prakash, Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi (Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ranchi) in MJ.C. No. 478 of 1980.

4. The aforementioned M.J.C. No. 54 of 1980 was filed by Bina Devi and her two minor children with regard to the death of Ramnarayan Prasad alias Ramnarayan Agrawal, husband of Bina Devi.

5. M.J.C. No. 72 of 1980 was filed by Sudha Devi and her one minor son, Bijay Prasad and one minor daughter, Bharti claiming compensation on account of death of Sheo Mohan Prasad, husband of the applicant Sudha Devi.

6. MJ.C. No. 478 of 1980 was filed by Rameshwar Sao and Saraswati Devi, claiming compensation for their sons death, namely, Kishore Prasad.

7. The material facts of the case leading to filing of the aforementioned three applications, are not in much dispute. On 18.1.1980, the aforementioned deceased persons, namely, Ramnarayan Prasad, Sheo Mohan Prasad and Kishore Prasad were coming to Ranchi from Lohardagga on a motor cycle bearing registration No. ASU 6650. It is alleged that while they reached near village Kokar Patratoli, a bus bearing registration No. ORN 475 came from the opposite side in a high speed and dashed against the motor cycle, as a result whereof all the three occupants of the aforementioned motor cycle were killed at the spot and the motor cycle was dragged to a distance of 100 yards on the road and ultimately the bus stopped after falling into a ditch and after dashing with a tree.

8. The appellant in all the appeals being the insurer in relation to the said bus was noticed. According to the appellant and the owner of the aforementioned bus, when the bus arrived near village Kokar, a Trekker (motor car) had been coming from opposite direction and the bus took side to give pass to the Trekker and when the Trekker had not covered completely the space after having been given the pass, suddenly the motor cycle appeared at the scene and dashed against the bus.

9. In M.J.C. No. 54 of 1980 and M.J.C. No. 72 of 1980 which proceedings, as mentioned hereinbefore, were heard analogously, the applicants in their respective cases besides other witnesses examined themselves. In the said case, a copy of the F.I.R. which had been lodged in relation to the aforementioned incident was proved, which was marked as Exh. 1. Exh. 3 is the copy of the post-mortem report. On behalf of the applicants a certificate was produced for the purpose of showing that Ramnarayan Prasad, who was a government contractor, had obtained some training in electrical engineering, which was marked as Exh. 2. A certificate was also proved to show the salary drawn by the deceased Sheo Mohan Prasad at the relevant time, which was marked as Exh. 4.

10. On behalf of the opposite parties, the duplicate copy of the insurance policy was filed, which was marked as Exh. A.

11. On behalf of the applicants, apart from the respective claimants one Chandra Mohan Prasad, who was travelling in the aforementioned bus, was examined as PW 3. He alleged that near Kokar, he saw a motor cycle coming from the side of Lohardagga at a distance of 100 yards. The said witness further stated that at that moment, the bus took a turn towards right after giving pass to a motor car and thereafter dashed against the motor cycle. It was further stated that the bus dragged the motor cycle and