THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.1752 of 2003 ORAL JUDGMENT: Heard both sides. 2. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the V Additional District Judge, Vijayawada- cum-Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for brevity ‘the Tribunal’) in M.V.O.P.No.638 of 1997, for the death of one Mallampalli Venkateswararao (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”), husband of petitioner No.1 therein, father of petitioner Nos.2 to 5 therein and son of petitioner Nos.6 and 7 therein, in a road accident that occurred on 25.04.1997, the appellant-Oriental Insurance Company Limited has preferred the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. 3. Before the Tribunal, petitioner Nos.1 and 6 examined themselves as P.Ws.1 and 2, respectively, and got marked Exs.A-1 to A-6 on their behalf. On behalf of insurance company, R.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.B-1 and B-3 were marked. Exs.X-1 and X-2 were marked with the consent of both the parties. 4. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that the claim petition was allowed by the Tribunal granting compensation of Rs.1,80,000/- basing on the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. SATPAL SINGH[1], fastening the liability on the insurance company. Insofar as unauthorized passenger, it is known fact that subsequently, in NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. vs. ASHA RANI[2], the view taken in Satpal Singh’s case (1st cited supra) has been overruled and it was held that a gratuitous passenger is not entitled to any compensation and accordingly, no liability can be fastened against the insurer. 5. In the instant case, in view of the said legal position, the impugned order of the Tribunal granting the compensation of Rs.1,80,000/-, while fastening the liability on the insurer cannot be accepted and as a consequence, the appeal is to be allowed. 6. It has been further brought to the notice of this Court that initially, pursuant to the orders of this Court, half of the awarded amount has already been deposited and the claimants also withdrew the same. In that view of the matter, at this length of time, I feel it inexpedient to issue directions to the appellant-insurance company to recover the said amount from the claimants. The insurance company is entitled to recover the amount already paid by it to the claimants from the owner of the vehicle-insured. 7. With the above observations, to the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed in part. However, there shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA 22nd July 2010 dr [1] 2000 ACJ 1 (SC) [2] 2003 ACJ 1 (SC)