Dr. Vineet Kothari, J. - (1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the National Insurance Company Limited, aggrieved by the award of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Churu dated 04.05.2000, deciding M.A.C Case No. 28/99 - Sahidan Bano w/o Kursheed & Ors. Vs. Sabeer Khan s/o Haji Rahim Khan & Ors., whereby the learned Tribunal, while deciding issue No. 4 against the appellant -Insurance Company had awarded the compensation of Rs. 3,82,200/ - for the death of Kursheed @ Khursheed in an accident, which took place on 15/16.12.1998 at 12:30 after midnight, when the said deceased was travelling in Jeep No. DL 4 CD 0771, being driven by non -applicant No. 2 -Farukh Ali and the said Jeep was owned by applicant No. 1 -Sabeer Khan.
(2.) THE findings of the learned Tribunal in the order dated 04.05.2000 for issue No. 4, are quoted below for ready reference: - The appellant -Insurance Company filed the present appeal aggrieved by the aforesaid findings of the learned Tribunal holding it liable to pay the said compensation, as the appellant -Insurance Company claimed that the deceased Kursheed @ Khursheed was a fare paying passenger in the insured Jeep and the insurance cover was only an "ACT ONLY POLICY" and did not cover the risk of fare paying passengers.
(3.) BY an order dated 03.02.2006, a coordinate Bench of this Court remitted the matter back to the learned Tribunal for returning fresh findings on the aforesaid issue No. 4 only, as the same were earlier given merely referring to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. Vs. Satpal Singh, : (2000) 1 SCC 237. The said order of the coordinate Bench dated 03.02.2006 is also quoted below for ready reference: - "Mr. Jagdish Vyas for the appellant. Mr. Rajesh Panwar for the respondent. Heard. This is an appeal by the Insurance Company. It had denied its liability in the light of the fact that the claimants in their claim petition have averred that the victim had hired the jeep for consideration. In that light of the matter, the Insurance Company has claimed that the claim petition should have been dismissed. As regards the Insurance Company, Issue No. 4 should have been decided in its favour. Findings on issue No. 4 by the Tribunal are cursory and no facts have been discussed except citing a case in the matter of New India Assurance Company Lt. Vs. Shri Satpal Singh. Merely writing the name of the case and then deciding the Issue, does not mean that the Tribunal had cursorily decided the Issue and therefore, findings on Issue No. 4 are liable to be set aside. Since the finding on Issue No. 4 are set aside, the matter requires to be remanded back for decision of the Tribunal on Issue No. 4. To that extent, the matter is remanded back for decision of the Tribunal. The Tribunal after recording its finding on Issue No. 4 would send its finding to this Court. Two months time is granted for the same. The parties will make themselves present before the Tribunal on 20.2.2006. The record of the case be sent back which after decision on Issue No. 4 will again be remanded by the Tribunal alongwith its finding as aforesaid. (Bhagwati Prasad), J.";