FAO (MVA) 284 of 2002. 6.5.2008 Present: M/s. K.D.Sood and Sanjeev Sood, Advocates, for the appellant. Mr. Harish Behal, counsel for respondents 1 to 4. Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, counsel for respondent No. 5. It is not disputed before me that the claim petition arises out of an accident of truck No. HP-49-0065, traveling from Manikaran to Bhunter, which resulted in injuries /death of the claimant(s) etc. It is also not disputed that other claim petitions arising out of this accident have been disposed of by a common judgment of this Court on 13.9.2005 passed in FAO (MVA) No. 286 of 1998 and connected appeals being FAO (MVA) Nos. 354, 286, 326 to 332 of 1998 and 63 of 2000. In those appeals, the finding of the Tribunal holding the Insurance Company liable to pay compensation was set aside with a direction that the claimants shall first be entitled to recover the amount from the Insurance Company and thereafter the Insurance Company will be entitled to recover the same from the owner. The direction issued is: “12. In view of the above stated position, all the appeals are allowed and the finding of the -2- Tribunal holding the insurer – appellant liable to pay compensation, is set aside. However, in view of the observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Baljit Kaur and others (2004), 2 SCC 1, it is ordered that the appellant shall first satisfy the awards and thereafter it may recover the compensation money from the insured, i.e. respondent Sanjay Kumar, the owner of the truck. And for recovery of the money from the insured, the appellant need not file a separate suit. Instead it may apply to the Tribunal for execution of this judgment.” This appeal is accordingly allowed and is disposed of in terms of the judgment passed by this Court in FAO (MVA) 286 of 1998 and connected matters. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending application (s) shall stand disposed of. May 6, 2008(PC). (Dev Darshan Sud), J.