Ramachandran Nair, J.

Both these appeals are from the award in O.P.(MV) No.653/2002 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda. In M.A.C.A.No.1400/2008, the claimants are the appellants and in the other appeal, the owner and driver of the offending vehicle are the appellants.

2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the view taken by the Tribunal that the Insurance Company is not liable to satisfy the award is not correct. The learned counsel relied upon various judgments of this Court explaining the meaning of the term "public place" under Section 147(1)(b)(i) of the Act. According to the learned counsel for the appellants, the Tribunal's view goes against the said legal position rendered by this court in various judgments.

3. The learned counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that going by the facts of the case, the view taken by the Tribunal cannot be said to be faulty.

4. Before going to the legal issues raised, we will refer to the necessary facts to analyse the contentions.

The claimants are the widow and children of one Sasidharan Nair who died in a motor accident at Vasupuram on 21.01.2002. He was working as Grade II Ope