U. L. BHAT, C. J. ( 1 ) THE insurer of a vehicle involved in an accident is the appellant therein. The legal representatives of a person who sustained fatal injuries in an accident involving the vehicle insured by the appellant filed an application before the M. A. C. T. and also prayed for compensation arising from 'no-fault liability' under S. 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The insurer admitted that the vehicle was covered by policy at the relevant time but disputed the liability on the basis of a condition of the policy excluding liability if the accident takes place beyond 80 kilo meters from Jabalpur. The Tribunal overruled this contention and awarded compensation under S. 92-A of the Act. ( 2 ) THE insurer challenged this award before this Court and the learned single Judge dismissed the appeal. Hence, this Letters Patent Appeal. The matter has been referred to Full Bench in view of doubt about the maintainability of L. P. A. (The Oriental Insurance Company v. Chintaman, C. R. No. 602 of 1992) connected cases, a Full Bench of five Judges of this Court has held that a decision under S. 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (corresponding S. 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939) is involved, is an award and an appeal lies against such award under S. 173 of the Act of 1988 (corresponding S. 110-D of the old Act ). The decision dismissing the appeal is a judgment for the purpose of cl. (10) of the Letters Patent (Nagpur ). We, therefore, hold that the Letters Patent Appeal is maintainable. ( 3 ) WE find in the facts and circumstances of the case that the decisions of the Tribunal and the learned single Judge are correct. The learned single Judge held that the applicability of the conditions to the given facts is foreign to the scope of enquiry in relation to claim under S. 140 of the Act. We agree with this view: L. P. A. is maintainable but dismissed for the reasons indicated above. Order accordingly. .