JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal is directed against the impugned award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur, dated 22.5.1992 deciding the Claim Case No. 106 of 1991 by the appellant-New India Assurance Company. 2. The appellant-Insurance Company submitted that liability of the Insurance Company is limited, according to the provisions of Section 95 of the old Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 to the extent specified in the Insurance Policy and, therefore, the Tribunal could not have directed the Insurance Company to pay the entire sum as per the impugned award. He further contends that penal interest @ 15% p.a. could not be awarded if the payment in question was not paid within three months. 3. As far as the award under different heads given by the Tribunal is concerned, I do not find any infirmity in the same and the Tribunal after considering all the relevant facts and circumstances of the case has awarded the compensation in question. 4. As regards the limited liability of the insurance company is concerned, since the accident in question is of 13.11.1986 prior to coming into force of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the provisions of Section 95 of the old Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 would naturally govern the field. He relies upon the judgments in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. v. Imlineken & Ors., JT 2000 (Suppl. 1) SC 224 ; Smt. Mallawwa etc. v. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors., JT 1998(8) SC 217 and National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Keshav Bahadur & Ors., 2004(1) WLC (SC) Civil 406 : (2004) 2 SCC 370 . On the strength of these judgments, learned counsel for the appellant Company submits that the liability for the insurance company was limited to the extent of Rs. 1,50,000/- only and, therefore, it could not be held jointly and severally liable for the entire award amount of Rs. 2,19,600/-. 5. There appears to be force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the insurance company. Under the provisions of Section 95 of the old Act, the liability of the insurer was limited to the extent of statutory limit in the absence of any specific agreement undertaking liability in excess of statutory limit and payment of additional premium. Therefore, in such cases, insurer's liability would be limited, to the extent provided in the statute. Under the provisions of Section 95 of the old Act, the liability of the insurer was limited to the extent of statutory limit in the absence of any specific agreement undertaking liability in excess of statutory limit and payment of additional premium. Therefore, in such cases, insurer's liability would be limited, to the extent provided in the statute. This is the ratio of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Keshav Bahadur's case (supra). Further award of panel interest of 15% p.a. in case of non-payment of compensation amount within three months also does not appear to be correct in view of the aforesaid judgments. 6. Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed and it is held that the liability of the insurance company could not exceed the statutory limit of Rs. 1,50,000/- and, therefore, the appellant-Insurance Company could not be held jointly and severally liable for payment of the entire award amount of Rs. 2,19,600/-. The award of 15% interest in case of non-payment within a period of three months is also liable to be set aside. Barring these two modifications in the impugned award, the rest of the award is upheld and the present appeal is disposed of in terms indicated above with no order as to costs.Appeal Allowed - Award modified as above. *******