HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO.2057 OF 2001 JUDGMENT:- 1. This appeal is filed by the appellant/Respondent No.4 against the order, dated 02.02.2000 passed by the Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District Judge, Hindupur in O.P.No.112 of 1998. 2. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Bangalore, which is the respondent No.4 before the Tribunal below preferred this appeal. 3. In the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act by an injured claimant for compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-, the learned Tribunal granted an amount of Rs.75,000/- as compensation. According to the claimant, he was driving the van bearing No.KA 40 113 from Hindupur to Penukonda on 11.09.1995 and the accident occurred at 7.30 AM when a lorry bearing No. KA 03 5240 driven in a rash and negligent manner at great speed came in the opposite direction and dashed the van. It is said that in the said accident two persons died and the claimant in the present case received grievous injuries. 4. A perusal of the order passed by the learned Tribunal indicates that it concurred with the version of the claimant and also the evidence adduced by him which include Ex.A.1 – certified copy of the first information report and Ex.A.5 – certified copy of the charge sheet that the accident took place solely on account of the rash and negligent driving of the lorry driver. The Tribunal also recorded a positive finding that the lorry driver alone was responsible for causing the accident. The said finding was incorporated in paragraph 8 of the order passed by the Tribunal. However, in paragraph 10 while answering issue No.3, the learned Tribunal directed the 4th respondent, which is the appellant herein to deposit the amount of compensation granted to the claimant into the Court within one month. 4. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/respondent No.4. None appeared for the respondents. 5. According to the appellant/4th respondent, the said direction was issued by mistake and therefore, it has to be set aside in this appeal. 6. As already mentioned above, there is no ambiguity in the finding arrived at by the Tribunal that the lorry driver alone caused the accident by his rash and negligent driving. In such an event, the tribunal ought to have fastened the liability on respondent No.1, the owner of the lorry bearing No. KA 03 5240 and respondent No.3 – insurance company with which the said vehicle was insured at relevant time. Therefore, in this appeal, the finding that the 4th respondent is directed to deposit the compensation amount is set aside. Instead THE respondents 1 and 3 are held jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimant and further respondent No.3 is directed to deposit the compensation amount of Rs.75,000/- with interest. Consequently, the appeal is allowed without any order as to costs. __________________ R. KANTHA RAO,J 24th November, 2009 kvrm