JUDGMENT : S.J. Hyder, J.—On June 3, 1971, at about 9.15 a.m., an accident occurred at Bhuli Road behind quarter No. A/208 in the town of Bhuli. In this accident, Thakur Bachha Nand Thakur alias Bachha Nand Thakur son of the claimant-Respondent sustained serious injuries. He was run over by a truck bearing registration number BRR 8184 which admittedly belonged to the Defendant-Appellant. 2. In connection with the said accident, a claim petition was filed by Parmanand Thakur, father of the injured boy, claiming compensation under Chapter VIII of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act'). The total compensation claimed by him amounted to Rs. 53,154.86 paise. The Claims Tribunal after hearing the parties awarded a total compensation of Rs. 13,620/- to the claimant-Respondent. The Defendant-Appellant had contested the claim petition inter alia on the ground that the same was not legally maintainable. In support of this ground, it was stated that the claim petition was not cognizable by the Tribunal as the truck was not insured. This contention was over-ruled by the Tribunal. 3. I have heard Learned Counsel for the parties and I have also gone through the record of the case. In my opinion, this appeal is well founded and must succeed. 4. A new Chapter VIII was incorporated in the Act by the amending Act 100 of 1956. This Chapter bears the heading "Insurance of Motor Vehicles Against Third Party Risks". Under the said Chapter are grouped together Sections 93 to 111-A. Section 93 of the Act contains definitions. Section 94(1) makes it obligatory for every person to get his vehicle insured with an authorised insurer. Sub-section (2) of that section, inter alia lays down that nothing in Sub-section (1) shall apply to any vehicle owned by the Central Government or a State Government and used for any commercial enterprise. On the other hand, its object was to serve the purpose of welfare. It was, thus, not required to be insured under Sub-section (1) of Section 94 of the Act. It is also evident from the facts of the case that the vehicle concerned was not insured under Chapter VM of the Act. Section 96 of the Act casts a duty on the insurer to satisfy a decree passed against persons insured against third party risk. Section 110 provides setting up of Claims Tribunals. It is also evident from the facts of the case that the vehicle concerned was not insured under Chapter VM of the Act. Section 96 of the Act casts a duty on the insurer to satisfy a decree passed against persons insured against third party risk. Section 110 provides setting up of Claims Tribunals. Section 110-B confers the power on Claims Tribunals to apportion the amount of compensation payable by the insured. It therefore follows that the provisions of Chapter VIII were not attracted to the facts of the case. Plaintiffs remedy, if any, was by way of suit for compensation in the civil court. 5. Now Sub-section (1) of Section 110-A requires that an application for compensation in case of injury can only be filed before the Tribunal by the person who has sustained any injury. The claimant, according to his own admission was the father of the boy alleged to have been injured in the accident. The claim petition was not in accordance with requirements of Section 110-A of the Act. On this ground also no compensation could have been awarded to the Plaintiff-Respondent. 6. For the reasons stated above, the order passed by the Tribunal on 21st January, 1977 in Title Suit No. 33 of 1971 deserves to be set aside. 7. The result is that this appeal is allowed. The order of the Claims Tribunal dated 21st January, 1977 passed in Title Suit No. 33 of 1971 is hereby set aside and the Plaintiffs claim is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.