JUDGMENT :

1. The present group of appeal is filed by the Oriental Insurance Company Limited against the common judgment and order dated 29.9.2006 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bharuch in Motor Accident Claims Petition Nos. 508 to 210 of 1997 and 521 to 528 of 1997 arising from one accident. In the said group of petition the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petitions of the original claimants and directed the insurance company to initially satisfy the claim of the original claimants and subsequently, recover from the owner of the offending vehicle involved in the accident.

2. Since present group of appeal arising from one accident and also from the common judgment passed by the learned Tribunal, all these appeals are decided by this common judgment.

3. The short facts giving rise to present appeals are as under:

3.1 On the day of the accident i.e. on 18.4.1997, the group of persons were travelling in the Tractor-Trolley being registration No. GJ-5-AA-9027 for attending a religious ceremony at Devmogra temple.

3.2 At that time, the Tractor-Trolley met with an accident and turned turtle. As a result of which three persons died and eight persons suffered injuries.

3.3 The claim petitions were filed by the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased persons and also all the injured persons before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bharuch being Motor Accident Claims Petition Nos. 508 to 210 of 1997 and 521 to 528 of 1997 whereby the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has partly allowed the Motor Accident Claims Petition Nos. 508, 509, 510, 521, 522, 524, 525, 526 and 527 of 1997 by granting different amount of compensation and Motor Accident Claims Petition Nos. 523 and 527 of 1997 were rejected.

4. Mr. Vibhuti Nanavati, learned advocate for the appellant-insurance company has submitted that the original claimants were sitting as gratuitous passengers in the Tractor, as they all went to offer a prayer to the goddess and therefore, the insurance company cannot be held liable to pay the compensation to the claimants. It is further contended that it is against the principle enunciated vide judgment reported in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Asha Rani and others reported in (2003) 2 SCC 223 and also in First Appeal No. 913 of 2011 and First Appeal Nos. 4601 and 4602 of 2007. It is also contended by the learned advocate for the appellant-insurance company that all the claimants were sitting as unauthorized passengers of the trolley attached to the Tractor and it is the case of the claimants that they were sitting in the trolley for going to village Devmogra Mandi for offering prayer to the goddess, but, the learned Tribunal has not properly appreciated the said fact, while deciding the issue of neligency. He further submitted that present appeal may be allowed and insurance company may be exonerated.

5. I have heard Mr. Vibhuti Nanavati, learned advocate for the insurance company at length. Though rule is served upon the respondents, none remained present at the time of hearing to oppose the present appeal.

6. The present appeal was admitted vide order dated 13.4.2007 and interim relief was also granted on condition that the applicant deposits entire amount as ordered by the Tribunal. Thereafter, on 17.7.2007, when this Court disposed of the Civil Application, passed following order:-

1.The present applications are for interim injunction pending the First Appeals which are admitted.

2. Heard Mr. Nair for the applicant. The respondents-claimants are served, except in the first matter, one of the claimants is not served, but nobody has appeared on their behalf.

3. This Court had granted ad interim injunction on 13.04.2007 and Mr. Nair states that as per his instructions, the condition is complied with and the amount is deposited. Hence, ad interim relief granted earlier is confirmed.

4. I have also heard the learned advocates appearing for the applicants on the aspects of with