ORDER D.V. Sehgal, President. - This appeal is directed against the award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karnal, dated 17.2.1993 in claim petition No. 127 of 25.10.1990. 2. In our order dated 16.11.1999 we had noticed that the learned Tribunal had assessed the liability of New India Assurance Company for the compensation payable to the appellants to the extent of 2/3rd. However, since the passengers who lost their lives in the accident were gratuitous passengers in the vehicle insured with United India Insurance Co. it was absolved of the liability. Only the owner and driver of the vehicle were made liable to the extent of 1/3rd. The bare reading of our order mentioned above shows that we have mentioned by mistake that 1/3rd of the liability is payable by the United India Insurance Co. 3. However, Shri R.S. Longia, learned counsel for the claimant-appellant/s had brought to our notice today the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in New India Assurance Company v. Satpal Singh, AIR 2000 Supreme Court 234, wherein the provisions of law and the changes in the relevant provisions made in the New Act had been noticed and distinction was drawn on the basis of interpretation. It was held by the Supreme Court that under the new Act, an insurance policy covering third party risk is not required to exclude gratuitous passenger in a vehicle no matter that the vehicle is of any type or class. The respondent Insurance Company had sought adjournment for today to get instructions. 4. We have been informed today by Shri Ravinder Arora, Advocate, on instructions from Mr. R.C. Sood, Manager, that the Insurance Company is not prepared to effect compromise for the reason that a question of law is involved which requires judicial adjudication. We are left with no doubt in our mind that in view of the final judgment of the Apex Court, no question of law remains to be decided. The judgment is very succinct and clear. Interpretation made leaves no scope for doubt whatsoever as to the provisions of law. It is clear that the carrier of a gratuitous passenger, when it is insured with an insurance company is liable under the new Act. 5. The judgment is very succinct and clear. Interpretation made leaves no scope for doubt whatsoever as to the provisions of law. It is clear that the carrier of a gratuitous passenger, when it is insured with an insurance company is liable under the new Act. 5. Shri R.S. Longia, learned counsel for the appellant/s has brought to our notice that the learned tribunal had absolved the United India Insurance Company from the liability and, therefore, the amount of 1/3rd compensation was directed to be paid by the owner and driver of the concerned vehicle. He further states that till today despite efforts, the appellant has not been able to recover any amount from the owner and driver of the vehicle. In view of recent judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in New India Assurance Co. v. Satpal Singh (supra), we direct United India Insurance Company to deposit 1/3rd of the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal alongwith interest in respect of the vehicle insured with it, which was involved in the accident, with the learned Tribunal within a period of two months from today. On deposit of the amount, the same shall be paid to the appellant/s in the manner already directed by the learned Tribunal. 6. In the above situation, we direct that while the New India Assurance Company shall deposit the amount of Rs. 31,773/- as its part of the liability in terms of the compromise dated 16.11.1999, the United India Assurance Company shall on our directions deposit the 1/3rd of the enhanced liability i.e. Rs. 15,867/- with the learned tribunal within two months from today. The entire amount of Rs. 47,600/- so deposited shall be paid in the manner and proportion already directed by the learned tribunal. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. A copy of this order beo given to the learned counsel for the appellants and the Insurance Company within seven days free of cost. Order accordingly.