- 1 - First Appeal No.753/2009 with Civil Application No.11161/2008 Heard learned counsel for the appellant. The appellant insurance company feels aggrieved by the award u/s 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The counsel urged, there is obvious breach of terms of policy and consequently there was no liability that the learned Member could have fixed as against the insurance company. During the course of submissions, Shri H.I. Pathan, learned counsel for respondents, has pointed out that the amount under award Rs.50,000/- has already been withdrawn by the claimants and the main petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act is at the stage of evidence. At this stage of the matter, though I find some substance in the contention of Shri Chapalgaonkar that the learned Judge should not have allowed withdrawal of the amount or fixed the indemnity, as the breach of terms of the policy is still to be highlighted, which the insurance company if feels well to do. If the insurance company establishes that there was obvious breach of terms of the insurance company as the deceased Tarabai was - 2 - travelling in the goods vehicle and further establishes that she was a gratuitous passenger not covered under the policy, the learned Judge is bound to pass appropriate order including reimbursement under NFL liability. In the above scenario, no interference is called for. Appeal lacks merits. It is dismissed with no order as to costs. In view of above order, Civil Application No. 11161/2008 is disposed of. (K.U.Chandiwal, J.) Dt/- 19.06.2009 ndk/c1960912