THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN L.P.A. No.165 of 2002 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S. Rao) This appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is against the judgment of the learned Single Judge in A.A.O. No.741 of 1992 dated 23.11.2001 whereby and whereunder the order and decree of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Warrangal in O.P. No.262 of 1989 dated 20.12.1991 was confirmed, dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant herein. On 30.08.1989, respondents 1 and 2 boarded the tractor-trailor to go from Yellarigudem to Maripeda Bangalow in Warrangal District. The respondent by name Venkanna along with others boarded the tractor, and at about 11.30 Am., the tractor met with an accident, Venkanna died. The parents instituted O.P. No.262 of 1989 under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation of Rs.92,000/-. The owner and driver of the tractor remained ex parte. The appellant herein opposed the O.P. with regards to negligence, and with regards the quantum as well as their liability to pay. They contended that the deceased was travelling in a tractor unauthorisedly as a gratuitous passenger and, therefore, it is not covered by the policy Ex.B-1. The Learned Tribunal, relying on the decision of this Court in Oriental Fire & General Insurance Co., Ltd. v. M. Bhanumathi[1] wherein it was held that the passengers carried in a goods vehicle for hire or reward are also covered under the insurance policy, overruled the objection of the appellant and awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/- as compensation payable to respondents 1 and 2. As already mentioned, the appellant was unsuccessful before the Learned Single Judge. There is no dispute that the accident occurred on 30.08.1989 prior to the amendment of Section 147 by Central Act No.54 of 1994 with effect from 14.11.1994. The issue as to whether a person travelling in a goods vehicle is entitled to compensation has been considered by a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court in New India Assurance Company Limited v. Asha Rani[2]. Following the same, this appeal is allowed without costs. However, it is made clear that any amount already paid by the appellant pursuant to the award of the Learned Tribunal, or during the pendency of the appeal, shall not be recovered from respondents 1 and 2. It shall be open to the appellant to recover the same from the owner of the tractor. ______________ V.V.S.RAO, J ___________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J 20.06.2011 MRKR [1] 1990 (1) Law Summary 213 s[2] (2003) 2 SCC 223 = AIR 2003 SC 607 = 2002 AIR SCW 5259