JUDGMENT

Sunil K. Kotwal, J. - These two appeals are filed by the National Insurance Company against the award passed by the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambajogai. First Appeal No. 829 of 2007 is directed against the judgment and award passed in MACP No. 62 of 2001 awarding compensation of Rs. 2,92,000/- to the original claimants with interest thereon at the rate of 7.5 % p.a. from the date of petition till the realization of entire amount and Respondent Nos. 1 to 8 are the original claimants, respondent No. 9 is the driver and respondent No. 10 is the owner of offending vehicle involved in the motor vehicles accident.. First Appeal No. 918 of 2007 is directed against the judgment and award passed in M.A.C.P. No. 61 of 2001 awarding compensation of Rs. 3,01,000/-inclusive of no fault liability amount. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are the original claimants, respondent No. 4 is the driver and respondent No. 5 is the owner of offending vehicle involved in the motor vehicles accident.

2. Brief facts in between the parties are that, on 1.5.2000 when deceased Atmaram Mundhe and one Fulchand Mundhe were traveling by motorcycle by Parali to Gangakhed on Ammajogai road, the offending truck bearing No. MTB-7410, which was coming from opposite direction of the road, dashed against the said motorcycle. In that accident, Atmaram Mundhe and Fulchand Mundhe succumbed to the injuries sustained in the accident. Therefore, a Motor Accident claim was filed by the claimants against the driver, owner and the appellant Insurance Company. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 3,01,000/- and Rs. 2,92,000/- to the claimants in the respective appeals, which is challenged in the present appeal.

3. Heard strenuous arguments submitted by Shri P.P. Bafna , learned counsel for appellant, Shri A.P. Bhandari, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 8 and Shri Sushil Deshmukh, learned counsel for respondent No. 10.

4. The learned counsel for appellant assailed the judgment and award passed by the learned Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambajogai, District Beed on two grounds. His first objection is that at the time of accident there was head on collision in between the offending truck and the motor cycle, therefore, there was contributory or composite negligence on the part of deceased. He claims that for these reasons there shall be only 50% liability to pay the compensation on the part of the Insurance Company. His next objection is that as the driver of the offending vehicle was holding driving license for driving ''light motor vehicle'' and as the offending truck is the heavy motor vehicle as mentioned in the registration certificate (Exh. 38), there was breach of conditions of policy of insurance and therefore the Insurance Company shall be absolved from every liability to indemnify the owner of the vehicle. He placed reliance on the judgment Apex Court in the case of " Bijoy Kumar Dugar vs. Bidya Dhar Dutta and Others" [(2006) 3 SSC 242] .

5. In reply, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 8 submits that from the FIR and documents placed on record, it emerges that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the offending truck. In the alternate, his submission is that, the Insurance Company did not obtain permission under section 170 (b) of Motor Vehicles Act. After careful examination of record and proceeding of the Tribunal, it emerges that by passing order below Exh. 47, the Tribunal has granted permission to the Insurance Company to take defences available to the owner of the vehicle. Therefore, certainly the Insurance Company can take defences available to the owner regarding the contributory negligence on the part of the deceased. The defences will not be restricted only to the extent of Section 149 (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

6. However, so far as the defence of contributory negligence of the deceased is concerned, it must be noted that in the written statement (Exh. 21), the Insurance