1. The insurer of the first respondent in M.C.O.P.No.1373 of 2002 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has preferred this appeal challenging in essence the maintainability of the very Claim.

2. Lokeshwaran was an employee of the second respondent (the first respondent before the Tribunal) as his lorry driver. On 18.05.1993, when he was on the wheels of the said lorry, due to a head on collision with a bus belonging to the State Transport Corporation, Lokeshwaran died on the spot. The claimant/first respondent is Lokeswaran's mother and she first moved the authority under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (would be referred to as WC Act) for the death of her son, but lost the claim. Instead of preferring an appeal under Sec.30 of the said Act, the claimant moved the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT for short) seeking compensation under Sec.166 of Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act, for short) with a claim of Rs.5.0 lakhs. This was resisted by the appellant insurance company of the lorry on the ground that inasmuch as the claimant had elected to prefer a claim under the WC Act, a second claim before MACT was not maintainable in view of the bar under Sec.167 of the Act.