JUDGMENT 1. - This is a Misc. Appeal against the award given by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dated 9th October, 1986. 2. The brief facts are that a claim was filed by the respondent No. 1 to 5 against the National Insurance Co. and Radha Kishan and Natwar respondent No. 6 and 7 with the allegation that on 24th June, 1982 the Bus No. R.J.L. 9036 belong to Radha Kishan was driven by Natwar on the route of Banswara to Khandu in a rash and negligent manner. At about 2-30 P.M., the bus got out of control near Chhatripara and it over turned as the result of this over turning. Balia who was the passenger in the bus crushed under the bus and died as a result of this accident. The Balia was a Baildar and he was on daily wages and earning a sum of Rs. 9/- per day i.e. Rs. 270/- per month. He was aged 40 years. Therefore, the dependents of Balia filed the present claim before the Tribunal after recording necessary evidence and hearing both the parties awarded a sum of Rs. 28,080/- and distributed the aforesaid amount proportionately to the claimants. 3. Aggrieved against this award the National Insurance Co. has filed present appeal on the ground that according to Section 95 Sub-section (2)(ii)(4) as it stood at that time, the time of accident is only liable to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/-. In this present appeal only this limited question has been agitated by the Insurance Co. that the Court below has completely lost sight of statutory liability under the Act. The respondents have contested the appeal. 4. I have heard both the learned Counsel for the parties and the question which falls for determination in the present appeal is that what it the statutory liability of the National Insurance Co. Under Section 95 Sub-section (2)(ii) Sub-clause 4. The provision reads as under: Subject to the limits aforesaid, ten thousand rupees for each individual passenger where the vehicle is a motor cap, and five thousand rupees for each individual passenger in any other case. 5. This was the provision existed at the time of the accident. It is true that this provision was amended later on with effect from 1-10-82 and the liability has not been increased from 5000/- to Rs. 15,000/-. 6. 5. This was the provision existed at the time of the accident. It is true that this provision was amended later on with effect from 1-10-82 and the liability has not been increased from 5000/- to Rs. 15,000/-. 6. The attention of the learned Judge was specifically drawn to this fact but he has somehow missed to take hot of the same. However, the claim of claimant will be adjudicated according to provision which existed at the time of accident took place i.e. on 24th June, 1982. Thus, the claim of the present claimant will have to be determined in terms of the provision as it stood at that time. At that time Insurance Co., liability in a case like a present one was to be to the extent of Rs. 5000/- only. As such the claimant will be entitled to sum of Rs. 5000/- from Insurance Company.This is view has been taken by Hon'ble Supreme Court in M.K. Kunhimohammed v. P.A. Ahmedkutty and Ors., 1987 ACJ 872 in that case also the liability of Insurance Co. made liable for a sum of Rs. 5,000/- only. It was observed as under: "Having regard to the statute as it stood prior to the amendments by Act 47 of 1982 we hold that the insurer was liable to pay up to Rs. 10,000/- for each individual passenger where the vehicle involved was a motor cab and upto Rs. 5,000/- for each individual, passenger in any other case. The judgment of the Kerala High Court against which this petition is filed has followed the above construction. We do not find any ground to interfere with it. This petition is, therefore, dismissed." 7. Similarly this Court also has in an identical situation as taken the same view in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Kasturi, 1986 ACJ 236 (Rajasthan) . It was observed as under: "Turning to the instant case in my hand, the claimants have not alleged any special contract or stipulation with the insurer. They have not filed the insurance policy issued to them by the insurer. The case is, therefore, governed by the Act Policy. The registered capacity to carry passengers in the bus was forty-eight. As such, the extent of the liability of the insurer to indemnify the injured is upto Rs. 5000/- only, in view of the provisions of Section 92(2)(b)(ii)(4) of the Act. The case is, therefore, governed by the Act Policy. The registered capacity to carry passengers in the bus was forty-eight. As such, the extent of the liability of the insurer to indemnify the injured is upto Rs. 5000/- only, in view of the provisions of Section 92(2)(b)(ii)(4) of the Act. The Tribunal crept into an error in directing the insurer to pay the entire amount of compensation of Rs. 42,000/- to the claimants. This error should be corrected." 8. In this view of the matter that according to the provision existed at the relevant time the appellant Insurance Co. is only liable to indemnify the claimant to the extent of sum of Rs. 5000/- only. 9. In the result the appeal is allowed and the award given by the Tribunal is modified to the extent that liability of the Insurance Co., shall only be to the extent of Rs. 5000/-. Rest of the award dated 9-10-86 is affirmed. No order as to costs.Appeal allowed. *******