JUDGMENT :

PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA, J.

1. Heard Mr. S.K. Muktar, learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsel representing the respondents.

2. This is an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the Judgment and Award dated 28.09.2018 passed by the MACT No. II, Kamrup (M), Guwahati in MAC Case No. 2164/2015.

3. The very short question involved in this appeal is as to whether a road inside a tea garden area is a ‘public place’ as defined by Section 2(34) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

4. The Tractor bearing Registration No. AS-27-A-0067 belonging to the respondent no. 2 company, caused the death of the deceased. The said accident took place in a road inside a tea garden. The Tribunal held that since the accident took place inside a tea garden, the place of the accident does not fall within the definition of ‘public place’ as defined in Section 2 (34) of the M.V. Act and that is why the Tribunal relieved the insurance company from its liability to pay compensation. Instead, the Tribunal directed the respondent tea company to pay the compensation.

5. Section 2 (34) of the M.V. Act reads as under:

“(34) “public place” means a road, street,