Mahesh Chandra Sharma, J.

All these misc. appeals arise out of common judgment and award dated 24.4.2012 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Addl. District Judge, Kekri ('the learned Tribunal' for short hereinafter), hence same are being decided by the common Judgment.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the legal representatives of deceased filed a claim petitions before the learned Tribunal mentioning therein that when the deceased Pratap, Sharwan, Mahaveer and Ratan were going as a pedestrian then a tractor bearing Registration No. RJ-01-RA-2248 attached with trolly came with high speed and due to rash and negligence of tractor driver, the tractor was over turned in which Mahaveer died on the spot and other persons namely; Pratap, Sharwan and Ratan sustained injuries. However, during the course of treatment they also died.

3. The learned Tribunal issued notices, The non-claimants No. 1, 2 and 3 therein filed reply to the claim petitions. Defences were also taken. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed four issues.

4. The learned Tribunal after hearing passed the impugned Judgment and Award.

5. The Insurance Company and the claimants aggrieved with the impugned judgment and award have preferred instant misc. appeals before this Court.

6. Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company has submitted that the learned Tribunal has erred in deciding issue No. 2 in favour of the claimants by holding that the Insurance Company should pay to the claimants and then recover the amount so paid from the owner/insured. Counsel has further submitted that the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned Judgment and Award has failed to take into consideration the following judgments:

1. National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Parvasthneni, Special Appeal (Civil) No. 10993/2009;

2. National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Yellamma & Anr. (2008) 7 SCC 526;

3. Samundra Devi v. Narendra Kaur (2008) 9 SCC 100;

4. Oriental Insurance Co. v. Brij Mohan, (2007) 7 SCC 56;

5. New India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Darshan Devi (2008) 7 SCC 416, and

6. United Indian Insurance Company Ltd. v. Tara Devi & Ors., 2010 ACC Part 1 page 78.

7. Counsel has further submitted that the learned Tribunal has exceeded the jurisdiction vested in it under law and exercised constitutional powers which lenders the impugned judgment and award null and void so far as the "pay and recover" order are concerned. Thus, the impugned Judgment and Award passed by the learned Tribunal be quashed and set aside.

8. On the other hand learned Counsel appearing for the claimants in the misc. appeals has submitted that while deciding the issue No. 1 the learned Tribunal wrongly held that deceased was travelling in the tractor-trolly. Counsel has submitted that the deceased was a pedestrian and came in the definition of third party. Counsel has further submitted that provisions of Section 173 of the Motor [hides Act, 1988 are fully applicable to the facts of the present case, which is produced hereunder:

"49. Duty of insurers to satisfy judgments and awards against persons insured in respect of third party risks.- (1) If, after a certificate of insurance has been issued under sub-section (3) of Section 147 in favour of the person by whom a policy has been effected, judgment or award in respect of any such liability as is required to be covered by a policy under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 147 (being a liability covered by the terms of the policy) is obtained against any person insured by the policy, then, notwithstanding that the insurer may be entitled to avoid or cancel or may have avoided or cancelled the policy, the insurer shall, subject to the provisions of this section, pay to the person entitled to the benefit of the decree any sum not exceeding the sum assured payable thereunder, as if he were the judgment debtor, in respect of the liability, together with any amount payable in respect of costs and any sum payable in respect of interest