JUDGMENT

1. Present miscellaneous appeal is filed assailing the award dated 31.3.2017 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior, District Gwalior in Claim Case No.260/2014, by which compensation to the tune of Rs.8,51,000/- has been awarded by the Claims Tribunal in favour of the appellants/claimants.

2. The relevant facts in brief to decide the present appeal are that the appellants/claimants filed the present claim petition with the averments that at the time of accident the deceased Narendra Jatav was traveling in a auto along with one Meera Bai and Muskan having Registration No.MP30/R/0872. On the spot of accident, respondent No.1-Bhagwant Singh, who was the driver of the vehicle, due to rash and negligent driving, turned the vehicle turtle due to which deceased received serious injuries and during treatment at J.A. Hospital he died. According to the appellants/claimants, the deceased was aged about 34 years and was working as a mason and was earning Rs.15,000/- per month.

3. The limited question before this Court is that whether the directions of learned Claims Tribunal to the effect that before release of the amount to the claimants, owner of the offending vehicle shall furnish security for the entire amount which the insurer will pay to the claimants is appropriate?

4. Learned counsel for the appellants argued that the owner of the vehicle was remained absent before the learned tribunal and he was proceeded exparte. The owner of the vehicle did not file written statement. In this situation the condition of furnishing the security before release of the awarded amount is not appropriate.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the insurance company argued that in the light of case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Challa Bharathamma and Ors. reported in (2004) 8 SCC 517, above case law, the direction of learned tribunal for furnishing the security before release of the awarded amount is appropriate, therefore, the present appeal be dismissed.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. It is well settled that in the cases where the insurer has been given the option and liberty to recover the amount from the insured, for the purpose of recovering the amount paid from the owner, the insurer shall not be required to file a suit. It may initiate a proceeding before the Executing Court concerned as if the dispute between the insurer and the owner was the subject matter of determination before the Tribunal and the issue is decided against the owner and in favour of the insurer. However, considering the beneficial object of the Act it would not be proper asking for the security from the owner of the vehicle before release of the awarded amount as in the present case the owner of the offending vehicle remained absent before the learned Claims Tribunal, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the condition that claimants shall be entitled to get amount of compensation from the insurance company only upon furnishing of such security by the owner of the offending vehicle would be against the beneficial object of the Act specially in the light of The judgment of 3 Judges' Bench of the Supreme Court in National Insurance Co,Ltd v. Swaran Singh and others, (2004) 3 SCC 297.

7. In the case of Smt. Bhuri and others v. Smt. Shobha Rani and others, 2007 (1) T.A.C. 20 (All.), wherein it was held (paragraph 5 of the said T.A.C.) that:-

"5. From the aforesaid case law, as referred to by the learned Counsel for the parties, it would be evident that in spite of the fact that the insurer is not made liable to compensate the claimants under the policy under section 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act, still the liability of payment, under the law as developed by the apex Court in this context, has been assigned to the Insurance Company. At the same time, the Insurance Company has also been given liberty to recover the said amount from the insured within the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act itself and wit