Judgment J.N.Bhatt, J. 1. After having head the learned Counsel for the parties and considering the factual profile, as well as, the legal aspect, this Court is of the opinion that there is no substance in the present appeal. The provisions of sec. 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (M.V. Act) came to be invoked by the parents of the deceased victim of an unfortunate accident by claiming an amount of Rs. 50.000.00 on "no fault liability" basis as there was death of the bread winner in the accident which occurred on 10.2.2001 at about 6.30 p.m. 2. The deceased was employed as Khalasi or cleaner by the owner of the vehicle known as Tata Sumo bearing registration No. JH 11A-0115, having Engine No. KRQ-762509 Chaiss No KRQ-923646 at the relevant time. On the fateful day, the vehicle started its voyage from China Kori Siyamatpur, District Bardman for Dhusamuri Bishanpur, District Khagaria. Unfortunately, the vehicle got overturned and fell into a ditch near Bakhari Bus Stand in which the deceased sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the same. Three persons sustained fatal injuries who were travelling in the ill-fated Tata Sumo" at the relevant time. 3. The heirs and legal representatives of the deceased initiated a claim by filing an application u/s. 140 of the M.V. Act before the Tribunal and upon consideration of the facts and circumstances, the concerned Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs. 50.000.00 with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the payment. Being aggrieved by the same, the appellant original respondent Insurance Company has questioned the legality and validity of the award. 4. It becomes very clear from the observations and the discussions made in paragraph 3 of the impugned award that the owner of the vehicle and the insurer appeared in the case and filed objections. The Insurance Company has raised the defence that the claim was not maintainable, as though the vehicle, alleged to have been involved in the accident, was insured, but, as such, the vehicle was not involved in the accident. 5. The Insurance Company has raised the defence that the claim was not maintainable, as though the vehicle, alleged to have been involved in the accident, was insured, but, as such, the vehicle was not involved in the accident. 5. After taking into consideration the text and tenor of the impugned order, as well as, submissions and the facts and circumstances emerging from the record, the Tribunal has concluded that the vehicle in question was insured and it has further observed, in the impugned award, that the factum of the insurance in respect of the vehicle Insured is an admitted position. 6. The contention contrary to the admission recorded in the award, now, sought to be raised by the insurance company, cannot be permitted to be raised once the proposition that the vehicle, in question, was insured was admitted by the insurance company before the Tribunal. As such, this plea in the appeal, for the first time, cannot be permitted to be raised. 7. The appellant insurance company instead of going for review, if there was any mistake on the part of the Tribunal, has directly, questioned the award when death of a young person was not in question. In a case of "no fault liability" under sec. 140 of the M.V. Act, no further evidence would be necessary. Rashness and negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle is presumed, as the claim, filed u/s. 140 is based on the doctrine of "no fault liability". Fault or no fault would not assume any importance in a claim and the resultant award u/s. 110 of the M.V. Act. It would not be necessary at this stage to go into a meticulous prove about the design and desideratum of the provisions of sec. 140 of the M.V. Act. However, the Tribunals view, in the light of the aforesaid aspects and discussions in the award, cannot be said to be, in any way, unjust, illegal, and perverse requiring interference of this Court, in exercise of its appellate power. Hence, the appeal shall stand dismissed with costs. 8. The appellant original respondent insurance company is directed to pay the amount of award, Rs. 50.000.00 (fifty thousand), with interest, within a period of four weeks from today, before the Tribunal, if the amount has not been deposited so far. The amount of Rs. 25.000.00 deposited in terms of the mandatory provision of sec. 8. The appellant original respondent insurance company is directed to pay the amount of award, Rs. 50.000.00 (fifty thousand), with interest, within a period of four weeks from today, before the Tribunal, if the amount has not been deposited so far. The amount of Rs. 25.000.00 deposited in terms of the mandatory provision of sec. 173 of the M.V. Act, shall stand transmitted to the Tribunal concerned for being disbursed to the claimant. However, if the amount deposited by the Insurance Company is found to be surplus than the amount awarded, it will be open for Tribunal to consider for the return or refund of the amount to the insurance company.