THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY C.M.A.No.782 OF 2004 JUDGMENT: This civil miscellaneous appeal is filed by the second respondent-insurance company, against the order and decree, dated 08.07.2002 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal – cum – Principal District Judge, Cuddapah, in O.P.No.1018/2001. 2. Heard. 3. The brief facts are as follows: On 24.10.2001 at about 4.30 a.m., while the deceased was proceeding from Cuddapah to Proddatur in the first respondent’s jeep bearing No.APD 6547, near Sai Leela Milk Factory the driver of the jeep drove the jeep in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against one person by name Shaik Hidayatullah, who was passing urine by standing behind his D.B.Cart and further dashed the D.B.Cart from its behind, on account of which the deceased who sat on the left side seat of the jeep was crushed between the jeep and D.B.Cart and died on the spot. The deceased was working as a salesman in a readymade shop and earning Rs.3000/- per month. Petitioners as legal representatives of the deceased, being wife, parents and daughter, claimed compensation of Rs.4,00,000/-. First respondent remained exparte. Second respondent filed counter denying the allegations of the petition. On the basis of the above pleadings, the following issues were framed: 1. Whether the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the jeep bearing No.APD 6547 by its driver? 2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation and if so to what amount and from whom? 3. To what relief? On behalf of the petitioners, P.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.A-1 to A-4 were marked. On behalf of the contesting respondent, R.W.1 was examined and Exs.B1 and B2 were marked. After considering the material on record, the Court below granted compensation of Rs.4.00 lakhs as claimed by the petitioners. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation, the second respondent-insurance company preferred this appeal. 5. Heard both sides. 6. Learned standing counsel for the appellant produced a copy of circular in Reference No.HO/MOTOR/JPS/2009/28, dated 27.11.2009 issued by the Deputy General Manager of the appellant company addressed to all the Regional Incharges wherein the concerned officials were directed to withdraw all the appeals filed on the ground that occupants of Private Car or Pillion Rider of a Two-wheeler under Standard Motor Package Policy are not third party. 7. In view of the above referred circular, the present appeal preferred by the insurance company is liable to be dismissed as the comprehensive policy covers all the inmates. 8. Accordingly, the C.M.A. is dismissed. No costs. ______________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J. 30th September 2010, Rns