R.K. Verma, J.

1.This is an appeal filed by the appellant insurance company against the award dated 1.7.1980 made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ujjain in Claim Case No. 45 of 1977 whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs. 15,000/- as compensation in respect of the death of the deceased Bhagwandas who died as a result of motor accident on 2.6.1976.

2. The facts giving rise to this appeal, briefly stated, are as follows:

On 2.6.1976, the deceased Bhagwandas, husband of the claimant-respondent No. 1, was travelling with his goods on the truck bearing registration No. 6993 which was coming from Indore to Kumbhraj, being driven by the driver Ramgopal, respondent No. 3. While the truck was near Kanasia on way to Kumbhraj, in the morning hours, it fell down near a culvert as a result of which the deceased Bhagwandas sustained injuries and died instantaneously. The claimant-respondent No. 1 who is the widow of the deceased Bhagwandas filed a claim petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the driver of the truck, its owner and the insurer, for compensation amounting to Rs. 2,90,000/- on account of death of her husband in the said accident, alleging that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending truck by its driver.

3. The learned Tribunal, on the basis of the evidence adduced in the case, found that the deceased husband of the claimant-respondent No. 1 died as a result of motor accident due to rash and negligent driving of the truck in question. The Tribunal found that the deceased Bhagwandas was around 35 years of age and had good health at the time of his death by accident. It also found that the deceased had kirana business at Sanai and earned Rs. 200/- per month from the said business and the claimant's dependency on the said income was to the extent of Rs. 100/-per month. The learned Tribunal held that the claimant is entitled to get Rs. 3,000/- as damages for mental shock and Rs. 12,000/- by way of general damages, i.e., in all Rs. 15,000/-for the death of her husband in the accident and that the driver, the owner and the insurer in respect of the truck in question are jointly and severally liable to pay the damages. Interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of the claim petition till realisation has been awarded on the amount awarded.

4. Being aggrieved by the award, the appellant insurance company has filed this appeal. The claimant-respondent No. 1 has, on the other hand, filed a cross-objection praying for enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal.

5. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant insurance company is that the deceased Bhagwandas was a gratuitous passenger on the truck and as such no claim for compensation could have been awarded for the death of a gratuitous passenger in the case. It has been urged that there is no evidence placed on record as to what goods, if any, the deceased was carrying on the truck. In the circumstances, the deceased cannot be regarded as travelling in the capacity of an owner of the goods for the safe carriage of the goods, so as to be covered by the Full Bench decision in Harishankar Tiwari v. Jagru 1987 ACJ1 (MP), which lays down that an insurance company is liable to cover the risk of a hirer/agent or his employee travelling with the goods in a goods vehicle under proviso (ii) of clause (b) of Section 95 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, as a passenger earned for reward or by reason of or in pursuance of a contract of employment.

6. The contention of the learned counsel that the deceased Bhagwandas was a gratuitous passenger does not bear scrutiny, as would be presently seen. In para 2 of the claim petition, it has been averred that on 2.6.1976, the driver respondent No. 3 was driving the truck from Indore to its destination Kumbhraj and that the claimant's husband, the deceased Bhagwandas, was travelling along with the goo