M.Ramakrishna, J. - (1.) The insurer-appellant is calling in question in this appeal the order made by the Member of the MACT, Bijapur, in MVC. 333/1985 on 19-6-1985 awarding an interim compensation of Rs. 15,000/- under Section 92-A of the M.V. Act, 1939 ('the Act' for short) to the claimants-respondents herein and directing the owner of the motor vehicle involved in the accident and the insurer to pay the said compensation within two months from the date of the order.
(2.) The main ground of attack by the appellant is that the applicant has not based his claim on tort and hence the claim is not maintainable before the Tribunal. In other words, the contention is that the compensation for the death of the deceased employee under the owner of the motor vehicle which met with the accident, in the instant case, ought to have been claimed under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 ('the Act of 1923' for short) and hence the compensation granted under the Act by the Tribunal cannot be sustained. We do not think there is any force in the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant.
(3.) Section 110-AA of the Act clinches the issue. Perusal of the same makes it clear that any person entitled to compensation for the death of, or bodily injury to any person may, without prejudice to the provisions of Chapter VII-A of the Act, claim compensation either under the Act or under the Act of 1923. Therefore, despite claim under cither Act for compensation, claim for interim compensation as required under Section 92-A is always open to the claimants. (emphasis supplied);