1. One Tilak Raj died on 12 October 1976, while he was employed with the petitioner as driver and was driving a four-wheeler tempo of the petitioner in the course of his employment. A claim petition was preferred by Munshi Ram and Shanti Rani, respondents, the parents of the victim, against the petitioner under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act (hereinafter called the Act), before the Commissioners constituted under the Act, claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 21,000. The petitioner in his written statement, inter alia, contended that the case was covered under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, and as the four-wheeler tempo which was being driven by the victim, Tilak Raj, at the time of the accident was insured with the New India Assurance Company, the insurance company was a necessary party. The Commissioner vide his order, dated 29 September 1977, dismissed his objections and held that the insurance company was not a necessary party. However, no reasons were given to warrant this conclusion. It is the said order that has been challenged in the present revision petition.
2. A close perusal of Ss. 94 to 96 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, shows that every vehicle has got to be insured in terms of the provisions contained in S. 95. Under proviso to Sub-sec. (1) (ii) (b) to S. 95, the policy of insurance has also to cover the liability in respect of the death arising out of and in the course of the employment of an employee of a person insured by the policy so as to cover the liability under the Act. Certificate of insurance is required to be issued under S. 95 (4). Under S. 96, in case a judgment regarding the liability is passed by a competent Court, then the insurance company, that is, the insurer is to be treated as a judgment-debtor. However, before the insurance company incurs the liability, notice is required to be issued to the insurer under S. 96 (2). A combined reading of Ss. 94 to 96 of the Motor Vehicles Acts makes it clear that the insurance company will be a necessary party in cases where the compensation is claimed under the Act on account of the death of an employee in the course of his employment on a vehicle which was insured under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act. According to the petitioner, the four-wheeler tempo on which the victim, Tilak Taj, was employed as a driver, was insured with the New India Assurance Company was a necessary party. The impugned order does not show that the learned Commissioner applied his mind to this aspect of the case. The impugned order is thus set aside and it is directed that the New India Assurance Company be impleaded as one of the respondents in the main petition. The revision petition is, consequently, allowed with no order as to costs.
3. The parties, through their counsel, are directed to appear before the Commissioner constituted under the Act on 20 March 1978.