N. Kirubakaran, J.

The appeals have been preferred by the Insurance Company assailing the award on the grounds of:

1. No existing policy.

2. The claimants were unauthorised persons.

Three M.A.C.T.O.Ps were disposed by a common judgment passed on 29.08.2007 in M.C.O.P. Nos. 122,123 and 124 of 2004 and therefore, these appeals are also dealt with and disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The first respondent in respective appeals were travelling in a van insured with the appellant which was engaged for carrying flower bags to Chennai on hire charges. As the goods were perishable goods and the same were to be delivered in time. The van was driven rashly and negligently and the vehicle fell into a pit and caused injuries to the first respondent in these appeals. Therefore, claim petitions were filed. The said claim petitions were resisted by the appellant/Insurance Company, contending that the first respondents/claimants are unauthorised passengers and there was no valid insurance policy.

3. The Tribunal, on enquiry found that:

(i) The van was driven in a rash and negligent manner and the driver of the said van was responsible for the accident.

(ii) There was existing policy and th