Judgment : DEOKI NANDAN PRASAD, J. ( 1 ) THIS misc. appeal is at the instance of Oriental Fire and General Ins. Co. Ltd. challenging the judgment dated 18. 12. 1992 passed by the motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-1st addl. District Judge, Singhbhum (West) at chaibasa, whereby and whereunder the learned Claims Tribunal allowed the compensation case in part and the appellant was directed to pay the compensation of rs. 15,000 under section 92-A of Motor vehicles Act. ( 2 ) THE short facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 8. 2. 1988 at about 3. 45 p. m. Pachai Hessa (deceased) was returning from Hat Gamaharia to his house at village Mata Guru (Jhinkpani ). As there was no bus available in the said route and, therefore, the deceased boarded the truck bearing No. BRS 5303 owned by Basant kumar Agarwal. There were also about 20 other persons boarded on the said truck. The driver of the truck, who was in drunken state started driving rashly and negligently and lost his balance and dashed the truck against a tree as a result of which the passengers were thrown away and Pachai hessa sustained severe injuries resulting in his death. Accordingly, the case was registered at the police station. It is also claimed that the deceased was working as a laboratory boy under A. C. C. Jhinkpani and at the time of accident he was only earning member of the family and accordingly the claim was filed for a compensation of rs. 3,00,000. ( 3 ) IN course of trial, witnesses were examined and some documents were also filed. After having heard both parties, the trial court passed the judgment impugned allowing a sum of Rs. 15,000 to be paid to the claimant by the appellant insurance company. ( 4 ) ONE cross-objection under Order 41, rule 22, Civil Procedure Code has also been filed on behalf of the owner of the truck (respondent No. 5) claiming therein that the appellant insurance company cannot avoid its liability as the interim compensation which was allowed by the court below is in respect of no fault. It is also stated that since the delinquent vehicle was insured validly at the relevant time, the appellant insurance company is liable to be made third party risk and, therefore, the appeal is fit to be dismissed. It is also stated that since the delinquent vehicle was insured validly at the relevant time, the appellant insurance company is liable to be made third party risk and, therefore, the appeal is fit to be dismissed. ( 5 ) THE learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, at the very outset, submitted that the learned Tribunal committed gross error in allowing the interim compensation of Rs. 15,000 under section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, when the appellant insurance company is not liable to pay the same, and policy of the delinquent truck did not cover the risk for death or injury to the passengers. It is also argued that though the court below specifically held in his judgment that the policy of the truck in question does not cover the risk relating to death or injury of passengers but even then allowed interim compensation, which is illegal and fit to be set aside. The learned counsel also relied upon the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Jethu Ram, 1998 ACJ 921 (SC ). ( 6 ) ON the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 5 submitted that he is the owner of the truck in question but he is not liable to pay compensation as the truck in question was duly insured under the policy of appellant. ( 7 ) SOME facts are admitted which are to be mentioned, at this stage, i. e. , the deceased actually boarded the truck as being a passenger. The driver was also under drunken state and he was driving the truck in a rash and negligent manner resulting in the accident. The trial court also concluded that the truck in question was meant for carrying on goods and there was no stipulation in the policy relating to the death or injury to the passengers carried in the truck. The court also held that the applicants are not entitled to claim compensation under section 110-A of the Motor vehicles Act. Thus, it is clear that the policy under which the delinquent truck was insured under Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. did not cover the risk relating to the death or injury to the passengers for which the insurance company appellant can be held to be responsible for the compensation. ( 8 ) IN the case of National Insurance Co. Thus, it is clear that the policy under which the delinquent truck was insured under Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. did not cover the risk relating to the death or injury to the passengers for which the insurance company appellant can be held to be responsible for the compensation. ( 8 ) IN the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Jethu Ram, 1998 ACJ 921 (SC), a similar matter was considered as the interim compensation was paid under section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act and it was held as under:"on a close scrutiny of the aforesaid provisions, we do not find anything contained therein which would suggest that the liability which accrues under the provisions of section 92-A has to be borne by the insurer even if it is ultimately held that under the policy of insurance the insurer is not liable to pay the compensation in question. " ( 9 ) THE truck was a goods carrying vehicle and as such the driver was not authorised to carry any passenger. If a goods carrying vehicle carried a passenger, the same will be unlawful. Under such circumstances any damage either to life or to the property of unauthorised passenger carried by the truck was not covered under the policy, when there is no stipulation in the said policy to this effect and, therefore, the insurance company cannot be held liable to pay even the interim compensation. As such, I find that the learned court below committed error in allowing the interim compensation against the appellant, which is fit to be set aside. ( 10 ) IN the result, I find merit in this appeal, which is accordingly allowed. The judgment dated 18. 12. 1992 is, hereby, set aside. Cross-objection filed by the respondent no. 5 is also devoid of any merit, which is rejected. Appeal allowed. --- *** --- .