ORDER 1. This appeal is preferred by the Insurance Company against a direction to pay and recover. 2. Short facts involved herein are that the deceased Somdatt Thakur was travelling in the truck bearing registration No.HR38-D-1288 which was going from Hyderabad to Delhi. It suddenly turned turtle near Deshgaon Ghati due to which Somdatt Thakur was injured and died on the spot. The truck was owned by respondent No.6 and was driven at the relevant time by respondent No.5. A claim petition was submitted by the claimants who are residents of Yillage Thana, Tahsil, Ledror, District Hameerpur, Himachal Pradesh. Learned Claims Tribunal, Khandwa passed an award in favour of the claimants for a sum of Rs. 3,91,0001-. Learned Claims Tribunal found that there was violation of the terms and conditions of the Policy and accordingly the Insurance Company i.e. the appellant was not found liable. However, applying the principles laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Jugal Kishore v. Ramlesh Devi [2004 (1) JUJ 110 = 2003 (4) MPLJ 546 ], learned Tribunal directed the Insurance Company to pay to the claimants the amount of compensation and recover the sum from the insured. Aggrieved by this, the present appeal has been preferred. 3. Shri Harpreet Ruprah, learned counsel contended that since the Insurance Company was not found liable, theory of pay and recover could not have been invoked by the Tribunal and the impugned award is liable to be set aside to this extent. 4. Recently in the case of National Insurance Company Limited v.Yellamma and another, (2008) 7 SCC 526 , the apex Court has held that the accident took place in the State of Karnataka whereas the claimant was from Ludhiana. Considering this, it was held that the claimant was not in a position to recover the amount from the vehicle owner. Likewise, in the present case, the claimants are from the State of Himachal Pradesh whereas the owner of the offending vehicle is from Delhi. Claimants are residents of rural area and they do not have any infrastructure and it may not be virtually possible for them to go to another State to recover money from the vehicle owner. On the contrary, the Insurance Company has an infrastructure and can easily recover the money from the truck owner. 5. Claimants are residents of rural area and they do not have any infrastructure and it may not be virtually possible for them to go to another State to recover money from the vehicle owner. On the contrary, the Insurance Company has an infrastructure and can easily recover the money from the truck owner. 5. Thus, considering the aforesaid facts, I do not find that the learned Tribunal had committed any illegality. Appeal being devoid of merits is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.