1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR First Appeal No. 1047/2010 (The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. VERSUS Tapan Tansen Kawale & others) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri A.R. Godbole, counsel for the appellant. Ms. M.H. Pathade h/f Shri P.S. Mirache, counsel for the R-1 & 2. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : OCTOBER 21 , 2010 . Heard. ADMIT. Call for Record & Proceedings. Learned counsel Ms. Pathade waives notice of hearing on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 2. C.A.F. 1910/2010. Heard. The learned counsel for the appellant states that the trial Court was not justified in fastening the liability of the compensation on the appellant-Insurance Company as the insurance policy covered the risk of the paid driver and since the deceased husband of the owner of the vehicle, which was involved in the accident, was admittedly not a paid driver and was working as a grocery merchant, the claimants, who 2 were the children of the deceased could not have filed the claim petition impleading the Insurance Company and their mother as party-Non-Applicants. The learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the other offending vehicle, which was an unidentified vehicle was not impleaded as a party to the claim petition. The learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that since the risk of the deceased, who was the husband of the owner of the vehicle, was not covered by the insurance policy and only the risk of the driver, who was a paid driver was covered under the terms and conditions of the policy, the Tribunal committed a serious error in fastening the liability to pay the compensation on the appellant-Insurance Company. The appellant has made out a strong prima-facie case in view of the policy document, which was produced on record of the Tribunal. It prima-facie appears that the Tribunal was not justified in fastening the liability on the appellant to pay compensation to the children of the deceased, who had filed the claim petition without impleading the offending vehicle as a party-Non-Applicant to the claim petition and though the deceased was not a paid driver. The submission made on behalf of the respondent- claimants that the respondents should be permitted to 3 withdraw the amount deposited by the appellant in this Court because the Tribunal has fastened the liability on the Insurance Company is not well founded in view of the prima- facie observations made hereinabove. In such circumstances, it would not be just and proper to permit the claimants to withdraw the amount deposited by the Insurance Company, during the pendency of the appeal. The amount deposited by the appellant should be placed in a fixed deposit account of a nationalized bank initially for a period of three years and the same should be renewed thereafter from time to time during the pendency of the appeal. The civil application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and disposed of. JUDGE APTE