The Court held that a cross-objection filed by the respondent in an appeal under Section 110d of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, is maintainable.

( 1 ) FOR personal injuries sustained in a motor accident, Sri Rash Behari Das, the respondent herein, filed an application under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for Calcutta and 24 Paraganas (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) claiming a sum of Rs. 84,000/- as compensation from the owner and insurer of the offending vehicle, the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 respectively in this appeal.

( 2 ) THE claimant's case was that on April 12, 1971 at about 3 p. m. while he was inspecting his lorry No. WBQ 3041, which was being repaired in the Automobile Welding Shop of Dulal Das situated near the junction of Diamond Harbour Road and Government Quarters thoroughfare, a passenger Bus bearing No. WBR 2837 then plying on Route No. 3b came from north along Diamond Harbour Road and while taking turn towards the Government Quarters Road in a terrific speed and without blowing any horn, came over him as a result of which he got pressed between the bus and the lorry and sustained previous injuries including multiple fractures. Due to the injuries sustained he had to remain bed-ridden for a continuous period of fourteen months and he has become almost invalid.

( 3 ) THE claim was resisted by both the appellants by filing two separate written statements though on similar grounds. It was not denied that the Bus belonging to the appellant No. 1 knocked down the respondent. They, however, denied that the accident occurred due to any rashness, negligence or fault on the part of the driver and contended that the respondent was solelv responsible for the said accident. It was, further, contended that the respondent suffered some injuries of minor nature and in anv case he was not entitled to any compensation.

( 4 ) IN support of his claim the respondent, besides examining himself, examined six other witnesses and exhibited some documents but no evidence was adduced on behalf of the appellants,

( 5 ) ON consideration of the materials on record, the learned Tribunal by his award dated June 9, 1977 held that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle and as such the owner was vicariously liable for the tortious act of her driver and must compensate the injured for the same. Considering the nature of the injuries sustained and the loss in earning capacity occasioned thereby the Tribunal assessed the compensation at Rs. 33,000/ -. The Tribunal directed the Insurer to pay the compensation by July 11, 1977 failing which the amount would carry simple interest at 6% per annum from that date until realisation. An all inclusive cost of Rs. 200/- was also allowed. Aggrieved by the said award of the Tribunal, the Owner and the Insurer of the offending vehicle preferred this joint appeal. Having come to know about filing of the appeal, the respondent, before service of notice of the appeal, entered appearance and filed a cross-objection challenging the adequacy of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

( 6 ) MR. Chowdhury, the learned Advocate appearing for the appellants firstly contended that the accident having not arisen out of the use of the vehicle in a public place the Insurer was not liable for any claim arising out of the accident in view of the provisions of Section 95 (1) (b) (i) of the Act. In support of his contention Mr. Chowdhury referred to the evidence of some witnesses, from which Mr. Chowdhury's inference was that the accident took place inside the Government Housing Estate situated on the west of Diamond Harbour Road and not on any public place. Mr. Ohowdhury submitted that the explanation to Section 95 (1) also could not come in aid of the respondent as the bus, while entering into the Government Housing Estate, which is a private place, met with the accident. According to Mr. Chowdhury, the accident did not take place nor can it be deemed to have been caused by or to have aris