SUDHIR NARAIN AND V. M. SAHAI, JJ. ( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, gorakhpur dated 30. 8. 2001 awarding a sum of Rs. 1,87,000 to claimants-respondents as compensation. ( 2 ) THE claim petition was filed by the claimants-respondents with the allegations that on account of the rash and negligent driving of the vehicle in question the accident took place resulting into the death of ghutur. ( 3 ) THE matter was contested by the appellant on various grounds, one of which was that the driver had no valid licence and that the vehicle was a goods vehicle. ( 4 ) WE have heard Mr. V. C. Dixit, the learned counsel for the appellant. ( 5 ) THE learned counsel for the appellant urged that the vehicle in question was a goods vehicle and the owner of the vehicle was not entitled to take passengers therein and if the owner of the vehicle takes passengers the insurance company cannot be made liable to pay the amount of compensation to such persons who suffered injuries while travelling in such vehicle. ( 6 ) IN New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Satpal Singh, 2000 ACJ 1 (SC), Honble supreme Court held that under the Motor vehicles Act, 1988 even gratuitous passenger in a vehicle is entitled to compensation if he has suffered injury while travelling on such vehicle. The court observed as under:"the result is 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. Hence, the decisions rendered under the old Act vis-a-vis gratuitous passengers are of no avail while considering the liability of the insurance company in respect of any accident which occurred or would occur after the new Act came into force. " ( 7 ) LEARNED counsel submitted that the said decision has been referred to a larger bench for reconsideration of question of law involved therein. As the decision has not been reversed we are bound to follow the aforesaid decision. ( 8 ) WE do not find any merit in this appeal. It is accordingly dismissed. ( 9 ) RS. As the decision has not been reversed we are bound to follow the aforesaid decision. ( 8 ) WE do not find any merit in this appeal. It is accordingly dismissed. ( 9 ) RS. 25,000 deposited by the appellant in this court shall be remitted by the registry of this court to the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal concerned for payment/adjustment of the amount payable by the appellant to the claimants-respondents. Appeal dismissed. .