Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. TJ Mahanta, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This appeal is directed against the impugned Award dated 28.2.97 passed by the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, North Lakhimpur in MACT Case No. 59 of 1994 awarding an amount of Rs. 12,000 against the claim of Rs. 1,80,000 made by the claimant who suffered a fractured leg due to the sudden application of the break of the vehicle by the driver while the claimant was travelling in the night super bus from Tezpur to Lakhimpur. 3. I have perused the award so passed by the learned Member of the Tribunal. On careful examination of the impugned award, it appears that the Tribunal has properly appreciated the evidences as well as considered the materials available on record and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, passed the award of Rs. 12,000 inclusive of interim relief, if any, with interest @ 12% from the date of claim till the deposit of the said amount in favour of the claim made by the appellant. 4. Having given my anxious consideration to the impugned award and upon hearing the learned counsel, I do not find any merit warranting interference with the award so passed by the Tribunal. 5. At this stage Mr. Dutta appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that since the claimant has suffered the injury due to falling of a suit case upon him for sudden put up of the break, the same cannot be said to be an accident covered under section 166 of the MV Act. On the other hand Mr. TJ Mahanta's contention & is that the injury so suffered by the claimant is definitely an accident which occurred during the course of his travelling in the said bus which was duly insured with the appellant and moreover, the claimant was having a valid ticket. 6. In support of his submission, he has put strong reliance in the decision of Smti Rita & others vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd reported in (2000) 5 SCC 113 corresponding to 2000 (2) GLT SC 1. In the said case the driver of the auto rickshaw was murdered by some miscreants in course of achieving the objective of stealing the said auto rickshaw from the driver. In the said case the driver of the auto rickshaw was murdered by some miscreants in course of achieving the objective of stealing the said auto rickshaw from the driver. The Apex Court held that the murder of the said driver was an accident arising out of a the use of the motor vehicle and Insurance Company was made liable for payment of compensation. I find force in the submissions so made on behalf of the respon­dent. I fully agree to apply the principle of the said decision in this case and accordingly hold that the injury suffered by the claimant in this case is an accident. 7. For the reasons and discussions made above, this appeal is dismissed. 8. As regard the interest, Mr. Dutta appearing for the appellant submits that in terms of the decision of the Apex Court in Kaushnuma Begum vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd reported in (2001) 2 SCC 9 the interest of 12% may be reduced to 9%. Accordingly the interest is reduced to 9% in the light of the said decision. This disposes of the said appeal.