R.K. Verma, J.

1. This order shall also govern the disposal of Misc. Appeal No. 111/85 (Raju v. Salauddinand Anr.), C.R. No. 194/85 (Abdul Gqffar v. Raju and two others) and C.R. No. 195/85 (Bafati v. Raju and two others).

2. This is an appeal by the claimant-injured against the award dated 5.1.1985 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, West Nimar, Nandleshwar in Claim Case No. 31/81, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 3, 500/- as compensation to the claimant with interest@ 6% per annum from the date of the claim petition (25.4.1981) till realization.

3. The facts giving rise to this appeal and the connected cases, briefly stated, areas follows:

On 16.12.1980, the appellant Salauddin and Abdul Gaffar and Bafati were going to weekly market for selling their goods and for that purpose they hired the mini-truck bearing registration No. CPF-9326, which they boarded along with the goods. On the way between Padlia and Jhirnya villages, the said mini-truck turned turtle near Ras-Baidy due to rash and negligent driving of the truck by its driver Raju. In this accident, the appellant-claimant Salauddin and Ors. on the mini-truck sustained injuries as a result of which one leg of the appellant-claimant was fractured below the knee.

4. Dr. Hukumchand Soni, Medical Officer of Primary Health Centre, Jhirnya (applicant's witness) medically examined the appellant-claimant and other injured persons on 16.12.1980. He found a fracture on the leg of the appellant-claimant. On examination of Abdul Gaffar he found a penetrating wound on his lower limb and two injuries on hischin. As regards the injured Bafati, Dr. Soni found a contusion 2" x 2" on dorsal aspect of foot of right leg showing tenderness and movements restricted. On further investigation by X-Ray at Barwani, Dr. Krishna Kumar Agarwal (applicant's witness) found that tibia fibula bone of right leg of the appellant-claimant Salauddin was fractured. As regards the injured Bafati, the meta-torsal phalengial joint No. 3 and 4 were displaced from its position towards right.

5. The claim cases No. 31/81, 30/81 and 29/81 were respectively filed by the appellant-Salauddin, Abdul Gaffar and Bafati respectively, before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mandleshwar. The cases of these claimants were consolidated for evidence by the learned Tribunal.

6. After trial, the learned Tribunal held that the truck in question was hired for carrying goods and that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the mini-truck in question by its driver Raju. It also held that the appellant-claimant suffered fracture of tibia fibula bone of his right leg.

7. As regards the other injured persons Abdul Gaffar and Bafati, the learned Tribunal found that Abdul Gaffar had sustained penetrating wound on the chin, lips and also a simple wound on the head and the injured Bafati suffered dislocation of meta-carpal phalengial joint.

8. The learned Tribunal, on the basis of evidence adduced in the case, awarded a compensation of Rs. 3, 500/- to the appellant-claimant and Rs. 1, 500/- each to the other two injured claimants Abdul Gaffar and Bafati, holding the driver Raju and the owner of the offend in vehicle Santosh Kumar jointly and severally liable. As regards the Insurance Company-respondent No. 3 which had admittedly insured the owner of the vehicle during the material period, the learned Tribunal found it not liable on the ground that the Insurance Policy as also Section 95 of the Motor Vehicles Act did not cover the risk of liability in respect of a person being carried in the goods vehicle, who is not an employee of the insured, placing reliance on a Division Bench decision of this Court in South India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Heera Bai and Ors. [1967 ACJ 65 (M.P.)].

9. Being aggrieved by the inadequacy of the compensation awarded and the finding that the Insurance Company was not liable to pay compensation to the appellant, the claimant has filed this appeal. The other in