The liability of an insurance company for compensation in motor accident cases is determined by the terms of the insurance policy, subject to the statutory minimum prescribed by S.95(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act. Amendments to the statutory minimum coverage amount do not apply to existing insurance contracts.

H. N. SETH, J. :- These two first appeals under S.110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act are directed against a common award made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Jhansi, in two claim petition Nos. 57 of 1970 and 70 of 1970 on 8-4-1974, and they can conveniently be disposed of by a common judgement.

2. On 18-4-1970 at about 5.30 or 6 p. m. bus No. USG. 4587 which was being driven by Mohan met with serious accident near village Bachkaoli. In that accident two passengers viz. Sita Ram and Radhey sustained fatal injuries. It was claimed that in that accident Smt. Muliya wife of Sita Ram and Smt. Chitiya daughter-in-law and Hira Lal grandson of Radhey who had been travelling in the bus also received injuries.

3. Whereas claim petition No. 57 of 1970 was filed by Smt. Muliya, Kumari Kesar, Ashok Kumar and Pappu claiming Rs. 20,000/- as compensation on account of the death of Sita Ram and Rs. 5000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by Smt. Muliya, the claimants in claim petition No. 70 of 1970 were Des Raj, Punna, Smt. Chitiya and Hira Lal who claimed Rs. 20,000/- as compensation on account of Radheys death and Rs. 5000/-each for injuries sustained by Smt. Chitiya and Hira Lal.

4. In both the petitions apart from Mohan Lal driver of the bus, Ram Narain Lal owner of the bus and New India Insurance Co. which had insured the bus were impleaded as opposite parties.

5. According to the claimants both the fatal accidents in question took place because of rash and negligent driving by Mohan Lal and therefore the three opposite parties were liable to compensate them to the extent mentioned in their claim petitions.

6. The opposite parties however contested the claim and alleged that at the relevant time the bus was being driven at a moderate speed of 35 km. per hour with due care and caution. Suddenly a few bullocks got astray and ran across the road. In order to save the bullocks the driver turned the vehicle towards his right and unfortunately the accident, in which Sita Ram and Radhey Lal lost their lives took place. According to them as there was no rashness or negligence on the part of the driver they were not liable to compensate the claimants. They also did not accept the nature and extent of injuries that were said to have been sustained by Smt. Muliya, Smt. Chitiya and Hira Lal.

7. The Claims Tribunal found that the accident in question had taken place because the bus was being driven by the driver rashly and negligently. So far as the injuries claimed to have been sustained by Smt. Muliya, Smt. Chitiya and Hiralal were concerned, the Claims Tribunal held that the claimants had failed to produce any evidence with regard to their nature and extent. In the circumstances their claim in respect of such injuries could not be accepted.

8. So far as Sita Ram was concerned the Tribunal found that at the time of his death he was 45 years old and that the dependency on him of claimants in claim petition No. 57 of 1970 was to the extent of Rs. 80/-. p.m. After giving allowance for the period during which the claimants would have remained dependants on the deceased as also for lump sum receipt of the amount, the Tribunal ruled that claimants would be entitled to Rs. 9600/- as compensation for the loss suffered by them on account of the death of Sita Ram. As, however, the bus in question had been comprehensively insured for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- the entire liability was to be met by New India Insurance Company.

9. While dealing with claim for compensation suffered by the claimants in claim petition No. 70 of 1970, on account of the death of Radhey, the Tribunal found that at the relevant time Radhey was 60 years old and he was not earning anything. The claimants were not dependant upon him and they did not suffer any monetary loss on account of his death. It, therefore, held that the claimants were not entitled to any compensation.

10. In the result in claim petition No. 57 of 1970 the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 9600/- to the claima