A. M. SAPRE, A. K. TIWARI, JJ. ( 1 ) THIS is an appeal filed under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act by the insurance company against an award dated 26. 8. 2000 passed in Claim case No. 119 of 1998 by the M. A. C. T. , Shajapur. ( 2 ) FACTS in brief are these: noor Mohammed was a cultivator of village Ranthbhavar in Tehsil and Distt. Shajapur on 2. 10. 1997, he claims to have hired one Matador bearing No. MP 13-E 1104 belonging to Radheshyam, the non-applicant no. 1, for taking his goods (wheat and soyabean) from Shajapur to Dewas. He also accompanied with goods in the said Matador which was being driven by govardhan, non-applicant No. 2. It so happened that while the loaded vehicle was proceeding towards Dewas, it dashed with the standing truck resulting in instantaneous death of Noor Mohammed. It is this incident that led to filing of claim petition by claimants who are legal representatives of late Noor Mohammed, i. e. , wife and son, out of which this appeal arises. In the claim petition, it was alleged that accident in question was due to rash and negligent driving of the vehicle in question by non-applicant No. 2. It was further alleged that vehicle in question being the goods vehicle was hired by the deceased for carrying his goods (grain) to Dewas and since it was insured with appellant insurance company at the relevant time the liability has to be shared by owner, driver and the insurance company jointly and severally. It was then alleged that deceased was aged 42 years and was earning around Rs. 60,000 yearly out of his business activity of sale of grain. It is essentially on these allegations the claim petition was filed. The defence was that of denial at the instance of all the three non-applicants. Parties then led evidence. The Tribunal by impugned award partly allowed the claim petition. It was held that deceased was travelling in the goods vehicle along with his goods and hence entitled to claim compensation. It was held that the motor vehicle in question was insured with the insurance company and hence they are equally liable to pay for the awarded sum. The Tribunal then passed an award for rs. 6,07,000 in favour of claimants. It is against this award, the insurance company has filed this appeal. It was held that the motor vehicle in question was insured with the insurance company and hence they are equally liable to pay for the awarded sum. The Tribunal then passed an award for rs. 6,07,000 in favour of claimants. It is against this award, the insurance company has filed this appeal. So far as owner and driver is concerned, they have not filed any appeal and hence an award as against them has attained finality. ( 3 ) HEARD Mr. S. V. Dandwate, learned counsel for appellant and Mr. Asif Warsi for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. ( 4 ) I laving heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record of the case find no merit in this appeal and hence the appeal deserves to be dismissed calling for no interference. ( 5 ) IN our considered opinion on facts found and the findings recorded, insurance company cannot escape from its liability. There is ample evidence to support the stand taken by the claimants that deceased had hired the vehicle in question for carrying his goods, i. e. , wheat/soyabean. It has come in the evidence of Begumbai, wife of the deceased, PW 1, Jakir Khan, son of deceased, PW 2, Shankar Lal, PW 3, a person who also had hired the vehicle for carrying his goods (wheat) and was travelling along with his goods. In the absence of any evidence tendered by non-applicants in rebuttal, we have no hesitation in upholding the finding recorded by the Tribunal on this issue and accept the version of PW 1, pw 2 and PW 3. This fact is also duly corroborated by the report of investigator dated 1. 4. 1998, Exh. D2-C. ( 6 ) ONCE it is held that the deceased was travelling in goods vehicle along with his goods as an owner then in such case the insurance company cannot escape from its liability. In other words, the law laid down by Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Baljit Kaur, 2004 ACJ 428 (SC), will apply against the insurance company and in favour of claimant and insured. We are unable to hold in favour of insurance company for want of any factual evidence that the deceased was travelling as gratuitous passenger in vehicle. Neither there is any factual foundation nor evidence to sustain such finding. Ltd. v. Baljit Kaur, 2004 ACJ 428 (SC), will apply against the insurance company and in favour of claimant and insured. We are unable to hold in favour of insurance company for want of any factual evidence that the deceased was travelling as gratuitous passenger in vehicle. Neither there is any factual foundation nor evidence to sustain such finding. ( 7 ) NOW coming to the second question regarding quantum of compensation, in our opinion, the appellant as an insurance company has no right to challenge the same. In the absence of any permission sought from the Claims Tribunal to contest the case on all the issues as contemplated under section 170 of the Act this court does not consider it proper to examine the issue of quantum at the instance of insurance company. That apart, taking into consideration the age of the deceased as 40, his yearly income Rs. 60,000, dependency, a sum of Rs. 6,00,000 cannot be regarded as on much higher side. We, therefore, uphold the finding of quantum. ( 8 ) IN view of aforesaid discussion, we find no merit in the appeal which is devoid of substance. It is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. Appeal dismissed. .