IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL. A.O. No. 435 of 2006 The New India Assurance Company Limited …. Appellant. Vs. Smt. Lakshmi Devi & another…Respondents. Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. S.C. Bhatt, learned counsel for the respondent/owner. Dated: 1-5-2008 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 22.4.2006, passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal/District Judge, Rudraprayag, in MACT Case No. 54 of 2005. 2- The brief facts of the case are that on 17-5- 2005 on Rishikesh-Badrinath Highway, in between village Nagrasu and Kameda, District Rudraprayag, bus No. U.P. 06-2005 was carrying a marriage party of village Sweet Patti Chalansyun, District Pauri Garhwal and due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus, the bus fell in a deep ditch, due to which most of the passengers of the bus died and few of them sustained grievous injuries. The claimant, Smt. Lakshmi Devi, filed the claim petition in lieu of death of her husband Laxman Singh, who breathed his last in this fateful accident. 3- The owner of the Bus contested the claim petition by filing his written statement and alleged that the Bus was covered under the insurance policy for whole liabilities for the period 24.5.2004 to 23.5.2005. The bus was being driven by the duly licensed driver, so the liability, if any, to pay the compensation falls upon the insurance company. 4- The Insurance Company also filed written statement and did not admit the accident for want of knowledge. According to the insurer the cheque issued by the insured in respect of payment of premium was dishonoured by the drawee bank and the insurance company cannot be held liable to pay compensation, as the insurance of the bus was cancelled on 9-7-2004 and its information was communicated to the owner of the vehicle through registered post on 13-7-2004. 5- The Tribunal framed issues in the claim petition. Thereafter parties led evidence in support of their cases. The Tribunal after hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the evidence on record, allowed the claim petition for a sum of Rs. 3,83,760/- against the New India Assurance Company. The Tribunal also directed the insurance company to deposit the amount of compensation by 15.5.2006 and if it is not deposited in time, then 8% compound interest will be levied at half yearly rest. 6- Feeling aggrieved, the New India Assurance Company has filed this appeal before this Court. 7- Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8- The controversy involved in this appeal is as to whether in view of the facts and circumstances narrated in the pleadings adduced by the parties as well as the evidence available on record, the Insurance Company is liable to make the payment of the award money or not?. 9- The learned counsel for the parties have filed before me the copy of judgment dated 20-6-2006 rendered by Division Bench of this Court in bunch cases A.O. No. 96 of 2006 and other connected appeals and contended that the controversy involved on the instant case has already been decided in the above mentioned cases and this case may also be decided in the same terms. I have gone through the above cited judgment dated 20-6-2006. The appeals in the cited cases have arisen out of the claim petitions, related to the same accident. The controversy in the cited case and the case in hand is the same. The Division Bench has held that the Insurance Company cannot be held liable to pay any compensation in the claim petitions arising out of the accident and remanded the claims to the Tribunal concerned for decision afresh. 10- After having considered the submission and going through the cited judgment dated 20-6-2006, I find that the facts of the cited case are squarely covered to the facts of the present case, therefore, applying the ratio of the above cited decision dated 20-6-2006, in A.O. No. 96/2006 and other connected appeals, the appeal in hand in liable to be allowed and the matter is to be remanded to the Tribunal concerned for decision afresh. 11- Accordingly, the appeal filed by the New India Assurance Company is allowed and it is held that the New India Assurance Company is not liable to pay any compensation. The impugned judgment and award dated 22-4-2006, made by the Tribunal, is hereby quashed. The claim petition is remanded back to the M.A.C.T. concerned, who shall decide the same afresh, after affording opportunity of hearing to the owner as well as the claimants. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) ISB