ash 1 fast-20165.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL ST.NO.20165 OF 2011 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. .. Applicant Vs Mr. Balu Ladku Patil & Anr. .. Respondents -- Shri A.A. Gatne for the Appellant. -- CORAM : A.S. OKA, J DATED : 21ST SEPTEMBER, 2011 P.C. . This Appeal is directed against an Award made in a Claim Petition under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ( hereinafter referred to as “the Said Act”) by which compensation of Rs.25,000/- has been ordered to be paid. The Appellant is the Insurer of the alleged offending vehicle. The policy was issued by the Appellant on 31st August, 2006 which was to be valid upto 31st August, 2007. The cheque issued by the Insured towards premium was dishonoured and on 3rd October, 2006, an intimation was sent by the Appellant to the RTO as well as to the Insured. The contention of the Appellant before the Tribunal was that on the date of the accident, the policy was not valid on the ground of dishonour of cheque. ash 2 fast-20165.11 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Appellant submitted that the cheque was dishonoured on the ground that the concerned Bank account was closed. He submitted that the intimation of cancellation of the policy was issued as aforesaid to both, the RTO as well as the Insured, and, therefore, the Appellant was not liable. 3. Perusal of the additional compilation filed on record shows that the intimation issued to the Insured was returned unserved with the remark “not known”. There is nothing on record, as of today, to show that any further attempt was made by the Appellant to serve the intimation to the Insured. Thus, from the material on record, it appears that till the date of the accident, the Insured was not served with the intimation of cancellation of policy. 4. The proceeding of the Claim Petition under Section 140 of the said Act is of summary nature. The findings recorded in the said proceedings do not bind the Tribunal while deciding the Claim Petition under Section 166 of the of the said Act. 5. Subject to what is observed above, no case is made out for interference. The Appeal is accordingly dismissed. ash 3 fast-20165.11 6. It is made clear that all the contentions of the Appellant including the contention regarding cancellation of the policy are kept open to be decided in the main Claim Petition. While deciding the main Claim Petition, the concerned Tribunal shall not be influenced by the observations made in the impugned Award and confirmation thereof by this Court. 7. The statutory amount under Section 173 of the said Act be transferred to the concerned Tribunal. 8. Civil Application No.3491 of 2011 does not survive and the same is disposed of. ( A.S. OKA, J )