HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.No.1866 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: The appeal is filed against the order in O.P.No.1446 of 2002 on the file of XII Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court (Fast Track Court) at Hyderabad, where-under consequent on the death of the deceased Rabia on 05.05.2002 at 5.30 a.m., while travelling in a lorry, due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry by its driver, it dashed against the stationed lorry and turned turtle, as a result of which, the deceased received injuries and died. The 1st petitioner claims to be mother and 2nd petitioner is sister of the deceased. The lower Tribunal having accepted the contention, found that there is no proof of contributory negligence on the part of the stationed vehicle and held that the deceased was not travelling in the lorry along with the goods as a owner of the goods. 2. Therefore, in view of the above circumstances as the incident was happened due to the fault of the driver in which the deceased was travelling, the deceased was a gratuitous passenger and when once the liability under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act was excluded, the question of making liability under Section 140 of the Act does not arise. Even otherwise in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in New India Assurance Company Vs. Asha Rani[1], the deceased being a gratuitous passenger, no fault liability is also not covered and therefore, the insurance company is also not liable to pay the same. But, however, as per the directions of this Court, the insurance Company has deposited half of the compensation amount and the petitioners shall proceed for the balance against the owner of the vehicle. The insurance company is also at liberty to proceed against the owner of the vehicle for the amount already paid to the petitioners. With the above direction, the appeal is disposed of. No costs. _________________________ N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO, J Date: 23.08.2011 INL [1] 2003(1) ACJ 1