ORDER :

1. Since these appeals filed under section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 arise out of same award dated 31.1.2008 passed by the Member Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Multai, District Betul in Claim Case No. 35/2006 [Yadorao vs. Ashok and Another] whereby Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 59,500/- alongwith interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of claim petition till realisation, they were heard analogously and are being decided by this common order.

2. Misc. Appeal 1532/2008 has been preferred by claimant-Yadorao praying for enhancement of amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, whereas Misc. Appeal No. 2735/2008 has been filed by the New India Assurance Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as the “Insurance Company”) praying for setting aside the impugned award passed by the Tribunal.

3. Brief facts of the case are that Truck No. MP-48/H-0180 is owned by Ashok S/o Ramkishan (hereinafter referred to as the “owner”). Claimant-Yadorao was employed as a Driver in the said aforesaid Truck. On 23.12.2003, the Truck was proceeding towards Pardurna loaded with groundnut bags. When the truck reached the place of unlaoding then at about 08.30 pm the claimant stepped on the loaded truck alongwith others and he was throwing the groundnut bags. Suddenly, the owner started the truck and consequently the driver fell down from it and sustained injuries. The claimant was admitted to Upadhyaya's Hospital at about 8.45 PM and, thereafter, he was treated at Abhay Jain Nursing Home, Pandurna w.e.f. 24.12.2003. The claimant was also given treatment at Nagpur where his hip and thigh bone operation was also performed.

4. After aforesaid accident the claimant filed claim petition under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the Tribunal by impleading owner and insurer of the truck. The claimant pleaded that since accident was caused by the negligence of driving of truck by the owner of vehicle, therefore, he is entitled for compensation to the tune of Rs. 4,24,000/- alongwith interest.

5. After service of notice the owner of the truck neither filed any reply nor contested the case, hence the Tribunal proceeded ex-parte against him.

6. The Insurance Company filed its reply denying the averments made in the claim petition and, inter-alia, pleaded that no such accident took place involving the vehicle in question. At the relevant time the claimant after consuming liquor in intoxicated condition was sitting over the gunny bags of groundnuts at godown. Hence, the claimant is not entitled for compensation. The accident is not connected with the vehicle, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.

7. On the basis of aforesaid pleadings of parties, the Tribunal framed issues, recorded evidence and after hearing the arguments advanced by parties before it, held that the accident took place due to negligent driving by owner of the vehicle, in which, the claimant sustained 20% permanent disability and taking into consideration facts of the case awarded total compensation of Rs. 59,500/-. The Tribunal also directed the Insurance Company to make payment of compensation on the principles of pay and recover in view of non-holding of driving licence by the driver of the vehicle.

8. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned award the Insurance Company has preferred an appeal (M.A. No. 2735/2008) on the grounds that Tribunal committed error in not going into the facts of case wherefrom it is established that after accident, no FIR was lodged at any Police Station and the accident had not taken place by vehicle (MP-48/H-0180) but took place in godown when after consuming liquor the claimant in intoxicated condition stepped over the gunny bags and fell down from there. The Tribunal further erred in believing the statement of claimant without considering that whether FIR was lodged soon after the accident to corroborate the statement of claimant. He prayed that findings recorded by the Tribunal are bad in law and hence, the impu