1. This first appeal against order raises an interesting question of law.

2. As a result of a motor accident Sitla Parshad, the respondent herein, received an injury, so as to cause disablement of a limb. He filed a claim application under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act before the Tribunal appointed under the Act. During the course thereof, the Tribunal passed an order on August 30, 1984, under S.92A of the Motor Vehicles Act, awarding interim compensation of Rs.7,500/- to the respondent, directing the Insurance Company, the appellant, to make payment thereof. It is to challenge that order that this appeal has been filed.

3. The primary contention of Mr. Gandhi, learned counsel for the Insurance-Company-appellant is that in the meantime the parent claim application has also been decided by the Tribunal, though incidentally against the appellant, and when an appeal has been preferred by it in this Court, it would be fair that the hearing of this appeal is deferred till that appeal is decided. The prayer is pregnant with the fear that if the present order gets confirmed, it might have the effect of holding for good the Insurance Company as liable to pay damages. But