ORDER A.S. Naidu, J. - Heard. 2. The Insurance Company has filed this appeal u/s 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act inter alia challenging the judgment dated 17.9.2003 passed by the Third MACT, Jajpur in MAC Case No. 60 of 2000. The aforesaid MAC Case had been initiated on the basis of a claim petition filed by the present Respondent No. 1 u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. It was averred that the claimant-respondent was the driver of the vehicle bearing Registration Number OR-02-11-2420 a Maruti Van. On 3.9.2000 while he was driving the said vehicle, the same met with an accident as a result of which he sustained fractures of his right knee and toe of his left leg. He was earning Rs. 3,000.00 per month and that due to aforesaid injuries he became fifty percent disabled. On the basis of such averments, he claimed a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000.00. After receiving notice the owner of the vehicle appeared the filed a written statement but then he did not contest the case. The present appellant Insurance Company as Opp. Party No. 2 before the Tribunal appeared in the case and filed its written statement vaguely denying the averments of the claimant-respondent and took a stand that the claimant should be put to strict proof of the averments made by him. 3. On the basis of the aforesaid pleadings, the Tribunal framed three issues. In support of his claim, the claimant-respondent got examined two witnesses and exhibited two documents. On behalf of the Insurance Company no witness was examined and only one document, i.e. copy of an Insurance Policy was produced. 4. The Learned Tribunal after discussing the evidence, both oral and documentary, arrived at the conclusion that the claimant suffered fifty percent disability due to fracture of his right knee patella leading to stiffness and paralysis of his right leg. Considering the avocation of the claimant and other materials, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs. 91,500/- in his favour with pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till payment. The said order of the Tribunal, as stated earlier, is assaied in this appeal by the Insurance Company. 5. Mr. 91,500/- in his favour with pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till payment. The said order of the Tribunal, as stated earlier, is assaied in this appeal by the Insurance Company. 5. Mr. Roy, Learned Counsel for the appellant Insurance Company, forcefully argues that as the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle, he cannot claim any compensation. The said contention is strongly repudiated by the Learned Counsel for the claimant-respondent. It is contended that in consonance with Section 167 of the M.V. Act, the claimant has a choice either to approach for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act or the Motor Vehicles Act. 6. It has been held by the Tribunal that in the accident the claimant-respondent sustained grievous injuries and became 50% disabled. The only other point which needs determination is as to whether the claimant should be compensated under the Motor Vehicles Act or under the Workmen's Compensation Act. u/s 167 of the M.V. Act, the claimant has a choice. The pleadings and other materials clearly reveal that the claimant was working as a driver under Respondent No. 2 and was driving the offending Maruti Van at the time of the accident. Admittedly the said vehicle was duly insured and the insurance Policy was valid on the date of the accident. 7. The owner of the vehicle is liable to pay the compensation and in return the Insurance Company is liable to reimburse the compensation amount either under the M.V. Act or under the W.C. Act. In view of the aforesaid clear position of law, the plea raised by Mr. Roy that the proceeding under the M.V. Act for compensation could not be sustained has no legs to stand. 8. Admittedly the accident took place in the year 2000. Four years have passed in the meanwhile. The claimant is a poor man who has become 50% disabled and his right leg has become paralysed. In such circumstances;, ft would be just and equitable not to keep this litigation pending any further. But then the award of compensation of Rs. 91,500 with 3% interest therecon appears to be on higher side. The claimant is a poor man who has become 50% disabled and his right leg has become paralysed. In such circumstances;, ft would be just and equitable not to keep this litigation pending any further. But then the award of compensation of Rs. 91,500 with 3% interest therecon appears to be on higher side. Considering the age of the claimant and other factors and hearing the Learned Counsel for the parties, in a spirit of Lok Adalat direct that the claimant-respondent be paid a compensation of Rs. 75,000.00 (seventy-five thousand) instead of Rs. 91,500.00 with 6% interest thereon from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of payment. Out of the aforesaid compensation amount, which shall be deposited by the Insurance Company before the Tribunal within six weeks hence as undertaken, a sum of Rs. 50,000.00 (fifty thousand) shall be kept in Fixed Deposit in a Nationalised Bank for a period of five years and the balance shall be disbursed to the claimant. The direction of the Tribunal for payment of penal interest is hereby set aside, but it is directed that if the Insurance Company failed to deposit the entire compensation amount within six weeks from today as undertaken, it shall be liable to pay interest on the entire compensation amount at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of payment. The amount said to have been deposited by the Insurance Company before this Court be returned to it by a grossed cheque.