THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO L.P.A. No. 196 of 1999 JUDGMENT : (Per Sri Justice K.S. Appa Rao) Being aggrieved by the judgment in C.M.A. No. 6 of 1992 dated 18.12.1997 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, dismissing the appeal and confirming the order passed in O.P.No. 353 of 1988 dated 30.7.1990 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy cum Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, the present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed. The appellant herein is Insurance Company/respondent no.3 in O.P.No. 353 of 1988. The Tribunal disbelieving documentary evidence in Ex.B1/copy of the insurance policy, marked on behalf of the Insurance Company, has awarded the compensation. It is the contention of the learned counsel for appellant that the deceased has violated the policy conditions of the insurance policy of the offending vehicle which was used for commercial purposes, whereas the insurance policy/Ex.B1 does not cover any risk of the passengers traveling in the commercial vehicles and the deceased being a passenger, the insurance company cannot be fastened with the liability. The learned counsel for the respondents submits the arguments supporting the impugned judgment. Now the point for consideration is; Whether the judgment in C.M.A.No. 6 of 1992 confirming the order passed in O.P. No. 353 of 1988 is sustainable ? Ex.B.1 is the crucial document which reads the liability of the Insurance Company, if any claim is made thereunder. A perusal of the conditions contained therein, it is clear that the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation, payable to the third parties, if the conditions of the policy are violated. Admittedly, the deceased was traveling as an unauthorized passenger transporting the goods on the tractor at the time of the accident. It is to be noted that the copy of the insurance policy Ex.B1 was marked before the Tribunal with the consent of the claimants. Now it cannot be said that the said document is not admissible in evidence, on the ground that it is only a photo-copy. The Tribunal has taken into consideration Ex.B1 and fastened the liability against the insurance company, which is not justified. In our view, on an overall scrutiny of the evidence and in particular Ex.B1, it was amply proved that the deceased by traveling in the offending vehicle has violated the terms of the insurance policy, therefore, the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation payable to the claimants. If at all any compensation is payable, it shall be payable by the owner of the offending vehicle. Therefore, the order impugned in this appeal is not sustainable and the same is hereby set aside. However, we make it clear that no further orders are required to be passed for the amounts deposited by the Insurance Company, pursuant to the earlier orders to the credit of the O.P., if same were withdrawn by the claimants. Subject to above observations, the appeal is disposed of. No costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH,J _____________ K.S.APPA RAO,J DATE: 28.10.2011 TVK THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO L.P.A. No. 196 of 1999 DT.28.10.2011