JUDGMENT : - Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (Oral): This appeal is directed against the award, dated 18.12.2013, passed by learned Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal-II, Sirmaur District at Nahan, in Claim Petition No. 88-N/2 of 2008, whereby the claim petition filed by the petitioners (respondents No. 1 and 2 herein) was allowed and a sum of Rs.3,10,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of filing of the petition was allowed in favour of the claimants. Since the insurance policy was proved on record, the entire liability was fastened on the appellant. 2. The appeal has been filed on a very limited ground that the appellant admittedly was impleaded as a party for the first time on 16.12.2012 and therefore, the interest could have been fastened on him with effect from the date of institution of the claim petition i.e. 27.7.2008. 3. Upon notice to the respondents, Sh. Karan Singh Kanwar, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the claimants-respondents No. 1 and 2, while the owner and driver of the vehicle on whom the primary liability rests have chosen not to put in appearance before this court. In so far as the learned counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2 is concerned, he could not dispute the contention of the appellant that it would only be liable for payment of the interest from the date it was impleaded as a party by the claimants themselves. However, he would contend that interest of the claimants be safeguarded and this amount be directed to be paid by the driver and owner of the vehicle. 4. In accidental cases the primary liability to pay compensation is upon the driver, who is guilty of negligence and the owner of the vehicle, who is said to be vicariously liable. The insurance company is only responsible to indemnify the loss provided the vehicle is covered by a valid insurance policy and the vehicle is not being driven in breach of the same. Therefore, the primary liability is absolutely on the driver, vicarious liability on the owner and only because of the statutory provision contained in Motor Vehicles Act coupled with the contract of insurance that the insurance company becomes liable. Therefore, the primary liability is absolutely on the driver, vicarious liability on the owner and only because of the statutory provision contained in Motor Vehicles Act coupled with the contract of insurance that the insurance company becomes liable. In other words, the insurance company under the law is required to indemnify the insured and unless the insurer himself is found liable to pay, there is no liability of the insurance company. It is only on account of the contract of insurance, that the appellant who was respondent No. 3 before the learned Tribunal below has been held liable to indemnify and consequently the liability to pay the award alongwith interest has been fastened upon the insurance company, but that does not mean that insurance company is also liable to pay the interest for the amount preceding the date when it was arrayed as party for the first time in the claim petition. In so far as the contention of respondents No. 1 and 2 that their interest be safeguarded, the award passed by the learned Tribunal already takes care of this situation, because at the first instance it is the owner of the vehicle, who is required to satisfy all the claims including the interest thereupon. Therefore, once the interest factor has been modified by this court, the necessary consequence which follows is that interest on the award amount prior to the impleadment of the insurance company on 16.12.2012 would be borne by the owner and driver of the vehicle. In order to make it more clarificatory, it is ordered that interest on the award amount w.e.f. 29.7.2008 till 16.12.2012 would be borne by the owner and driver of the vehicle, who are respondents No. 3 and 4 herein. Accordingly, the appeal stands allowed and the award passed by the learned Tribunal below to this limited extent is modified, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.