JUDGMENT :

Heard the parties.

2. This appeal is preferred against the award dated 12.09.2012 passed in Claim Case No.27 of 2006 by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chatra whereby and whereunder, the appellant being the owner of the vehicle in question, was directed by learned MACT, Chatra, to pay Rs.3,60,000/- to the claimants as compensation and to pay Rs.50,000/- to the Insurance Company who has to pay the claimants within one month from the date of award, failing which, he will have to pay interest @ 7 % from the date of award till its realization.

3. The brief facts of this case is that the claimants are respectively the husband and children of the deceased-Aasha Devi who died by succumbing to the injuries sustained in the motor vehicle accident on 17.01.2006 while she was travelling in the tractor which was driven by the respondent no.6 herein in rash and negligent manner and the said tractor and trailer turned turtle because of the said rash and negligent driving.

4. At the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant-owner of the vehicle, confines his challenge to the impugned award only to ground that the learned MACT, Chatra ought to have directed the Insurance Company to pay the compensation amount to the claimants and later on recover the same from the appellant-opposite party no.2, and submits that the appellant abandons all other grounds, agitated by the appellant in the appeal memo. Learned counsel for the claimants-respondent nos.1 to 5 also supports the contention of the appellant that learned MACT, Chatra ought to have directed the Insurance Company being respondent no.7 to pay the compensation amount to the claimants and to recover the same from the appellant.

5. In support of her contention, the learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Shivawwa and Anr. Vs. Branch Manager, National India Insurance Company Limited and Anr. reported in (2018) 5 SCC 762, para 13 of which reads as under:

“13.Assuming for the sake of argument that the Insurance Company was not liable to pay compensation amount awarded to the claimants as the offending tractor was duly insured, the insurer would still be liable to pay the compensation amount in the first instance with liberty to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle owner (Respondent 2), in light of the exposition in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Singh, (2004) 3 SCC 297 : 2004 SCC (Cri) 733].

(emphasis supplied)

and submits that in the said case the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has in no uncertain manner has laid down the principle of law that even though the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation amount still the insurance company can be directed to pay the compensation amount to the claimants of the motor vehicle accident compensation case and to recover the said compensation amount later on from the owner of the vehicle without filing any fresh case and by executing the orders so made by the tribunal. It is then submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant, that the impugned award being not in consonance in law to the aforesaid extent, hence the impugned award be modified by directing the respondent number 7 Insurance Company to pay the compensation amount to the claimants and later on recover the same from the appellant.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent no.7 being the Insurance Company on the other hand submits that it is a case where neither the victim nor the Insurance Company has preferred any appeal and the owner of the vehicle who ultimately has to pay the amount, has at the time of hearing of this appeal did not challenge his liability to ultimately pay the compensation amount and at the time of hearing of argument of this appeal, the appellant-owner of the vehicle, has voluntarily confined his challenge to the impugned award only to the extent that the learned tribunal ought to have passed a pay and recovery order directing the