T. Nandakumar Singh, J.

1. Heard Mr. Dani Sharma, learned Counsel for the Appellant, Insurance Company and Mr. Dijen, learned Counsel appearing for the claimant Respondents.

2. For the judgment and order proposed to be passed in the present appeal, detailed facts leading to the filing of the WC Case No. 11/06 is not required to be mentioned.

3. It is the admitted fact of both the parties that the offending vehicle (Goods carriage) having registrationNo.MN01-5151 is owned by the Respondent No. 2 and the present Appellant is the insurer of the said offending vehicle. The Respondent No. 1 claimant's son, Md. Nahapik, was employed as Handyman of the offending vehicle by the Respondent No. 2 who is admittedly owner of the vehicle.

4. The offending vehicle met with an accident on 8.6.04 and at the time of the accident Respondent No. 1's son, Md. Nahapik, was employed as Handymen of the offending vehicle by the Respondent No. 2. As a result of the said motor accident, Respondent No. 1's son, Md. Nahapik, died.

5. For that motor accident, the Respondent No. 1 filed Claim Case No. 11/06 against the owner of the offending vehicle, i.e. Respondent No. 2 in the present appeal and the Insure