JUDGMENT : B.N. Mahapatra, J. - This is an appeal against the judgment dated 04.09.2007 passed by learned 3rd Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar (for short "the Tribunal") in Misc. Case No. 416 of 1997 2. The case of the claimants before the Tribunal is that on 15.09.1997 while the deceased along with her family members and other co-passengers was returning to her village by a Tata Sumo bearing registration No. OR-02-F-0222, the said vehicle dashed against a truck bearing registration No. WMO-98 which was coming from opposite direction. In the said accident, the deceased sustained severe injuries. After the accident, the deceased was shifted to Tangi Hospital for treatment. From Tangi Hospital while she was taken to S.C.B., Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack for better treatment, she succumbed to the said injuries. The police registered an accident case against the driver of the offending truck. The further case of the claimants is that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving by drivers of both the vehicles. The deceased was aged about 17 years and a student of Class-X. In her leisure time, the deceased along with her sister was doing stitching of the dress materials of villagers and was earning Rs. 300/- per month. Out of this profit, the deceased was contributing towards maintenance of the family. The deceased was a goods student and in the year of accident she was to appear at the Board examination. Her future was to be a Nurse. With the above averments, the claim petition was filed claiming compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- 3. Both the owners of the vehicles involved in the accident did not contest the case. They were set ex parte. Both the insurers of the offending vehicles contested the case by filing separate written statements denying almost all the material facts alleged in the claim petition. They have denied their knowledge about the validity of the Insurance Policies and driving licences of drivers of respective vehicle and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition. The learned Tribunal framed as many as three issues. After taking into consideration the materials on record, the Tribunal held that due to rash and negligent driving of drivers of both the vehicles the accident took place. All the four claimants before the Tribunal are entitled to compensation. The learned Tribunal framed as many as three issues. After taking into consideration the materials on record, the Tribunal held that due to rash and negligent driving of drivers of both the vehicles the accident took place. All the four claimants before the Tribunal are entitled to compensation. The Tribunal further held that both the vehicles were duly insured by the Insurance Company, i.e., the opposite party Nos. 3 and 4 and they are liable to pay the compensation at the ratio of 50:50. With the above findings, the Tribunal determined the amount of compensation at Rs. 1,60,000/- Being aggrieved with the said judgment of the learned 3rd M.A.C.T., Bhubaneswar, the Appellant -Insurance Company has filed the present appeal. 4. Mr. M. Sinha, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant -Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. contends that since the deceased was traveling in private Tata Sumo bearing registration No. OR-02-F-0222, she is not entitled to get any compensation as it violates the policy conditions. It is further contended that the deceased being a student she had no personal income. 5. Mr. P.K. Mishra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the claimants submits that since it is a comprehensive policy, the passenger traveling in a private vehicle are automatically covered by the said policy and are entitled to get compensation. In support of his submission, he cited and relied upon a decision in Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Arati Mishra and Anr. (2009) 2 CLR 579. It is further submitted that the Tribunal has adopted annual notional income of Rs. 15,000/- as per Schedule-2 of the Motor Vehicles Act considering the fact that the deceased had no income at the relevant time. In the said accident, two daughters of the claimant- Respondents died. In other Misc. Case No. 416 of 1997, in respect of another sister of the deceased, the Appellant -Insurance Company has paid its share of 50% of the awarded amount as directed by the learned Tribunal and the claimant- Respondents have already received the compensation. In the present case, 50% as awarded has already been paid by the other Insurance Company, namely, United India Insurance Company. 6. The argument of Mr. Mishra, learned Counsel that Tata Sumo was covered by a comprehensive insurance policy has not been disputed by Mr. Sinha, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Insurance Company. In the present case, 50% as awarded has already been paid by the other Insurance Company, namely, United India Insurance Company. 6. The argument of Mr. Mishra, learned Counsel that Tata Sumo was covered by a comprehensive insurance policy has not been disputed by Mr. Sinha, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Insurance Company. Hence, in view of the principles decided by this Court in Arati Mishra (supra), the claimants are entitled to get compensation. So far as income is concerned, since the notional income as provided under Schedule-2 has been taken into consideration by learned Tribunal, there is no infirmity in the order of the learned Tribunal to determine the compensation at Rs. 1,60,000/- even if the deceased has no income which appears to be just and proper. 7. In view of the above, the Appellant is directed to deposit 50% of the amount of compensation, i.e., Rs. 80,000/- along with interest @ 7% from the date of filing of the appeal till the date of deposit before the learned Tribunal within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order. After such deposit is made, the same shall be disbursed to the claimants in the same manner as was directed by the learned Tribunal. On production of the receipt showing payment of awarded amount along with interest as indicated above, the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court shall refund the statutory deposit of Rs. 25.000/- along with interest accrued thereon to the Appellant Insurance Company. In the result, the appeal fails and dismissed. Final Result : Dismissed