1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. FIRST APPEAL No. 14 OF 2010 IN CIVIL APPLICATION No. 575 OF 2010 National Insurance Co. Ltd. .. APPELLANT VERSUS Murlidhar Sambhaji Raut & another .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL No. 15 OF 2010 IN CIVIL APPLICATION No. 577 OF 2010 National Insurance Co. Ltd. .. APPELLANT VERSUS Bhimrao Yeshwant Asole & another .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL No. 16 OF 2010 IN CIVIL APPLICATION No. 578 OF 2010 National Insurance Co. Ltd. .. APPELLANT VERSUS Shivram Kachru Dhavase & another .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL No. 17 OF 2010 IN CIVIL APPLICATION No. 580 OF 2010 National Insurance Co. Ltd. .. APPELLANT VERSUS Naryan Namdeo Vaidya 2 & another .. RESPONDENTS ... Shri S.V. Kulkarni, Advocate for appellant CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2010. PER COURT: All the four First Appeals involve common facts and are therefore, decided together. 2. The Insurance Company has preferred this appeal against the Award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dated 29th September, 2009, thereby directing the respondents to pay compensation of Rs. 30,000/- to the claimants including ‘no fault liability’ amount of Rs. 25,000/-, along with simple interest at the rate of 6% per annum. 3. Shri S.V. Kulkarni, learned Counsel for the appellant contended that the Judgment passed by the Tribunal is per-se and ex-facie erroneous, inasmuch as the Insurance Company was not liable to pay any amount, as there was no valid policy in existence, on the date of the alleged 3 accident. According to him, the cheque given by the insurer was dishonored and as no premium was paid , the Insurance Company would not be liable. On this count itself, the Award passed by the Tribunal deserves to be set aside against the Insurance Company 4. Per contra, Shri Deshmukh, learned Counsel for the claimants submitted that before the Tribunal, the Insurance Company had filed a written statement and made vague averments regarding validity of the Insurance Policy. It was no where contended by the Insurance Company in the written statement that the cheque issued by the insured was dishonored and they have intimated the factum of dishonor of the cheque to the insured. According to him, the Tribunal has rightly passed the Award against the present appellant also. 5. With the assistance of learned Counsel for the respective parties, I have gone through the record, the pleadings, evidence and the Judgment. On perusal of the evidence it is 4 manifest that the Insurance Company has not made any whisper about the dishonor of the cheque, only vague averment is made that the Insurance policy is bad in law on account of operation of Section 64(5) (b) of the Act. Apart from the same there was nothing on record before the Court to recording a finding that the cheque given by the insured towards the premium was dishonored, and the said fact was intimated to the claimants. In such circumstances, no fault could be found in the Award passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has awarded modest amount, as compensation. Mr. Kulkarni fairly admits as far as quantum is concerned, the same is not being assailed and his argument rest on the liability of the Insurance Company to pay the amount. Mr. Kulkarni, in alternate further submitted at least the amount that would be paid by the Insurance Company may be directed to be recovered from the owner. This argument could have been considered if on record, the factum of dishonor of cheque and the intimation by the Insurance Company to that effect to the insured would have been placed. In absence of said factual matrix, I am unable to 5 accept the arguments of Shri Kulkarni. 6. In the result, First appeals are dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. 7. In view of the fact that First Appeals are dismissed, the claimants are allowed to withdraw the amount deposited by the Insurance Company in this Court. 8. In view of the disposal of First Appeals, the Civil Application Nos. 575 of 2010, 577 of 2010, 578 of 2010 and 580 of 2010 does not survive, and the same are disposed of accordingly. [S.V. GANGAPURWALA,J] SDM* 541.10FA