(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI)

The appellant has not taken steps as against respondent Nos.1 and 4 and conditional order was passed on 03.02.2025 that if steps are not taken, the appeal as against respondent Nos.1 and 4 would be dismissed. Despite such order, steps are not taken.

2. Be that as it may, the present appeal is filed by the Insurance Company contending that fastening of liability on it is erroneous. It was contended that a vehicle Piaggo Auto is with a trolley and the deceased was traveling in the trolley and as such, he is gratuitous passenger. Therefore, the policy conditions were violated and the liability fastened upon it is erroneous.

3. It is needless to say that a passenger in a goods vehicle is permitted to travel if he is travelling with the goods. The records reveal that deceased was none else than the owner of the goods. Therefore, it cannot be said at any stretch of imagination that the deceased was a gratuitous passenger. The accident had occurred while he was fetching his sound system articles from a function.

4. Under these circumstances, the appeal even if is considered on merit, it is bereft of any acceptable contentions. In that view of