HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Sinale Bench : Hon'ble Shri Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh. J. ^ Miscellaneous Appeal (C.) No.525 of 2007 Appellant Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited, through Branch Manager, Pandri, Raipur (C.G.) Respondents versus 1. Ishwar Prasad, s/o Neel Kanth Verma, aged about 40 years, 2. Smt. Firantin Bai, w/o Ishwar Prasad, aged about 35 years, both R/o through Faguram Sahu, Village Baghera, Ward No.49, P.S. Pulgaon, District Durg (C.G.) (Claimants) 3. Jairam @ Jai Singh, s/o Jait Ram, aged about 33 years, R/o Itai, P.S. Nadghat, Distt. Durg (C.G.) (Driver) 4. Doodhnath, S/o Jait Ram, aged about 44 years, R/o Itai, P.S. Nadghat, Distt. Durg (C.G.) (Owner) Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 as amended by Act of 1994 Present : Shri Sachin Singh Rajput, counsel for the appellant. Shri Avinash Chand Sahu, counsel for respondents No.1 and2. Shri Sanjay Patel, counsel for respondents No.3 and 4. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 29 day of February, 2008) Heard. (2) A short question that arises for determination of this appeal is whether in a case where theMotor Accidents Claims Tribunal recorded a finding that the appellant/insurance company was not under any liability to pay compQnsation in view of a fundamental breach of the policy of insurance ,by the owner of the tractor No.CG 07D/2607 by \ allowing the deceased 'phild to travel on the tractor, it was justified in °% passing an order of pay and recover against the appeltant/insurance company. (3) The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has recorded a finding that the deceased, a child aged 11 years, was travelling on the tractor and died due to rash and negligent driving of the tractor by respondent No.3. (4) Shri Sanjay Patel, learned counsel for respondents No.S/driver and No.4/owner of the tractor did not dispute that the appellant/insurance company was not under any liability either statutory or contractual to cover the risk of the child travelling on the tractor and further stated that the owner did not challenge the finding r^corded by the M.A.C.T that the deceased child was travelling on the tractor. (5) In this view of the matter, the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal erred in passing an order of pay and recover against the appellant/insurance company. The liability to pay compensation as awarded by the learned M.A.C.T. rests solely with the respondent No.4/owner. Ordered accordingly. Respondent No.4/owner shall deposit the compensation awarded with the M.A.C.T. within 30 days of this order, failing which, upon initiation of execution proceedings by the claimants, the M.A.C.T. shall attach the tractor No.CG 07D/2607. If necessary, it may also take assistance from the concerned Regional Transport Authority. It shall also be open to the executing Court to direct realisation of the amount awarded from any oth'er property of the owner. \ (6) The appeat (s allowed. iUs Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge Gopal