JUDGMENT : P.P. Naolekar, J. 1. As the common question of law involved in these appeals, they are heard and decided together. The relevant facts in brief are that on 4.3.1992, two vehicles, one truck insured by M/s New India Assurance Company Limited and a Maruti Car insured by M/s Oriental Insurance Company Limited met with an accident. In the said accident, the passengers travelling in the Maruti Car, Ranjit Sarkar, the husband of the claimant, Ms. Bithika Sarkar, died and the claimant, Ms. Bithika Sarkar received injuries. Claim petition was filed by the claimant, Ms. Bithika Sarkar, before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhubri, praying for compensation for the death of her husband and the claimant has filed another claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation for the injuries sustained by her. 2. During the pendency of the claim petition both the matters were referred to the Lok Adalat and the Lok Adalat held on 11.2.1996 has passed an Award of Rs. 60,000.00 in MAC Case No. 46/92 against M/s New India Assurance Company Limited in the case of death of Ranjit Sarkar being the liability of the insurer of the heavy vehicle (Truck). In other case, i.e., MAC Case No. 47/92, the Lok Adalat passed an order for payment of Rs. 12,500.00 against M/s New India Assurance Company Limited for the injuries sustained by the claimant, Ms. Bithika Sarkar. As M/s Oriental Insurance Company Limited was not before the Lok Adalat, the proceedings were taken up in the original claim petition. Thereafter the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhubri, has held that the deceased and the claimant, Ms. Bithika Sarkar were the gratuitous passengers travelling in the Maruti Car when the accident took place. On this finding, it is held that M/s Oriental Insurance Company Limited was not liable to pay compensation. However, the learned Tribunal had again directed payment of compensation of Rs. 60,000.00 in the case of death of the husband of the claimant and Rs. 12,500.00 for the injuries sustained by the claimant by M/s New India Assurance Company Limited. Aggrieved by the said order, M/s New India Assurance Company Limited has filed two writ petitions. Both the writ petitions were dismissed by the learned single Judge and that is why the present appeals are being filed and placed before us for decision. 12,500.00 for the injuries sustained by the claimant by M/s New India Assurance Company Limited. Aggrieved by the said order, M/s New India Assurance Company Limited has filed two writ petitions. Both the writ petitions were dismissed by the learned single Judge and that is why the present appeals are being filed and placed before us for decision. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant M/s New India Assurance Company Limited that once the Lok Adalat passed the Award for payment of compensation that attains the finality and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal could not have passed an additional Award against the appellant M/s New India Assurance Company Limited when the matter was taken up for adjudicating the liability of the insurer of the Maruti Car, namely M/s Oriental Insurance Company Limited. 3. We find substance in the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant that once an Award or Order is passed by the Lok Adalat directing payment of compensation that Award or Order attains the finality and it cannot subsequently be challenged by virtue of the provisions u/s 21(2) of The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, which reads as follows : "21. Award of Lok Adalat - (1).... (2) Every award made by a Lok Adalat shall be final and binding on all the parties to the dispute, and no appeal shall He to any court against the award.". Under this provision, the Award passed by the Lok Adalat has attained the finality and no appeal lies against such Award. Therefore, the Award of compensation passed by the Lok Adalat directing payment of compensation by M/s New India Assurance Company Limited has attained the finality and it could not be disturbed in the matter which was taken up by the Tribunal for adjudicating the liability of the insurer of the Maruti Car. 4. It appears from the Award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal that the claimant has alleged that in the Maruti Car deceased and the claimant, Ms. Bithikia Sarkar, were gratuitous passengers and, therefore, the insurers of the heavy vehicle and the Maruti Car were liable to compensation on account of the death of her husband and the injuries sustained by her. In the Lok Adalat the extent of liability has been determined against M/s New India Assurance Company Limited that has attained the finality. Bithikia Sarkar, were gratuitous passengers and, therefore, the insurers of the heavy vehicle and the Maruti Car were liable to compensation on account of the death of her husband and the injuries sustained by her. In the Lok Adalat the extent of liability has been determined against M/s New India Assurance Company Limited that has attained the finality. Therefore, to fasten the liability on M/s Oriental Insurance Company Limited, it was necessary for the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to arrive at a finding that there was contributory negligence on the part of the two vehicles, namely Truck and the Maruti Car insured by M/s Oriental Insurance Company Limited and M/s New India Assurance Company Limited, respectively. If the Tribunal reached the conclusion that the claimant and her husband were the gratuitous passengers in the Maruti Car, then the liability can be fixed on the owner of the vehicle. As M/s Oriental Insurance Company Limited was not the party before the Lok Adalat, it did not pass any Award fastening the liability on M/s Oriental Insurance Company Limited. The matter was taken up by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to adjudicate upon the liability of M/s Oriental Insurance Company Limited or the owner of the Maruti Car. When the matter was taken up by the Motor Accident claims Tribunal to adjudicate upon the liability on M/s Oriental Insurance Company Limited or the owner of the Maruti Car, it could not have passed an Award against M/s New India Assurance Company Limited. The extent of liability would have depended upon the finding as regard the contributory negligence on the part of the two vehicles. The Tribunal would have to decide the question as to whether the deceased and the claimant were the gratuitous passengers. Unless and until those questions are determined, the Tribunal could not have passed the Award. The Tribunal has completely lost sight of the fact that the claim petition was taken up to ascertain and adjudicate upon the liability on M/s Oriental Insurance Company Limited and the owner of the Maruti Car only and the Award against M/s New India Assurance Company Limited had attained the finality by the order passed by the Lok Adalat. The Tribunal has completely lost sight of the fact that the claim petition was taken up to ascertain and adjudicate upon the liability on M/s Oriental Insurance Company Limited and the owner of the Maruti Car only and the Award against M/s New India Assurance Company Limited had attained the finality by the order passed by the Lok Adalat. When the issue involved in the claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal was only in regard to determination of liability on M/s Oriental Insurance Company Limited, it has committed an error in passing the Award against M/s New India Assurance Company Limited. 5. We find that no clear cut finding has been recorded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal regarding contributory negligence of the two vehicles, which met with an accident on account of which the husband of the claimant has died and she sustained injuries. Nor there is a finding whether the deceased and the claimant were the gratuitous passengers in the Maruti Car. In absence of such finding, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cannot decide the matter regarding liability of M/s Oriental Insurance Company Limited or the owner of the Maruti Car. In that view of the matter, we set aside the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dhubri, fastening the liability on M/s New India Assurance Company Limited and remand MAC Case no. 46/92 and MAC 47/92 for reconsideration of the claim cases in the light of the observations made hereinabove. The order of the learned single Judge is also set aside. The records of the case, if any, be sent back.