FARHAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD 50. FAST/12678/2008 51. FAST/12682/2008 52. FAST/12687/2008 53. FAST/12685/2008 54. FAST/12631/2008 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders CORAM: K.U. CHANDIWAL J. DATED: 4th May, 2010. P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. D.S. Kulkarni for the appellant/Insurance Company, Mr. A.S. Shelke for original claimants and Mr. Kakade respondent No. 2. 2. The Insurance Company, in the group of appeal, feels aggrieved by the award in terms of Section 140 of the Motor Vehicle Act, in favour of respective claimants, awarding Rs. 25,000/- to each of the claimant under the category of no-fault-liability. 3. The Insurance Company by placing the policy on record and the circumstances that there were 9 claimants, although the insured has reasonably established that the driver by taking 15 gratuitous passengers in the vehicle, the goods truck, unauthorizedly, has breached the terms of insurance coverage. The natural result thereof was 2 exoneration of Insurance Company to answer the liability. There is nothing to demonstrate, the claimants in their individual capacity or otherwise were travelling in the goods vehicle as owners of transported goods. In the light of this situation, the award of the learned Judge in terms of section 140, directing the Insurance Company to meet the same, call for interference. No fault liability does not provide a mileage to claimant to stake claim against insurance company, when later owe no such indemnification. 4. Taking stock of the evidence and the legal position, I find that the learned Judge certainly erred in fixing the liability of indemnification of appellant/Insurance Company to pay the amount under award. Consequently, the award to the extent of appellant/Insurance Company is set aside. No costs. [ K.U. CHANDIWAL J. ] ssc/fast12678.08