HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.2224 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: The appeal is filed by the appellant/2nd respondent against the order in O.P.No.142 of 2000 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge, Adilabad, questioning the liability of the appellant herein. 2. According to the case of the petitioners, on 30.09.1998 the deceased K.Vijay Kumar and others engaged the tractor and trailer bearing No.AP 1/T 1706 and 1707 for immersion of the Durga Devi idol and when the tractor was going, it came into contact with a live electric wire due to the rash and negligent driving by its driver, as a result of which, the said Vijay Kumar died along with another. The petitioners are the dependants. The 1st respondent is owner of the vehicle and the 2nd respondent is Insurance Company. The 1st respondent did not file any counter and the 2nd respondent filed a counter denying the liability and also the nature of the incident and quantum of compensation. The lower Tribunal after considering the evidence on record, found that the tractor was engaged by the deceased and others for immersion of the Durga Devi idol and due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver, the incident was happened. The fact remains that the vehicle is a Tractor and trailer, which was not meant for engaging any other purpose except for agriculture and the purpose for which it was used is violation of the conditions of the Policy. The lower Tribunal relying on some Judgments and held that the appellant shall first pay and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle though there is no liability. 3. Evidently, the appellant cannot be held liable as the violation of conditions of the Insurance policy are admitted. When there is no liability to pay the amount, the question of directing the Insurance Company to pay and recover does not arise in view of the Judgment reported in National Insurance Co., Ltd., Vs. Bommithi Subbhayamma and others[1]. However, in view of the fact that the appellant has already deposited half of the decretal amount, the amount can be recovered by the appellant from the owner of the vehicle and the claimants can recover the balance of compensation from the owner of the vehicle. Accordingly, M.A.C.M.A. is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________________ JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO Date:22.09.2011 INL [1] 2005 ACJ 721