JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act challenging,the judgment and award dated 1-5-2004 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karauli. 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 25-2-2001 when the appellant was standing at the Salempur Bus Stand for going to Gangapur, Tractor No. RJ-25-R-7910 came, which was going towards Gangapur. When the claimant asked for lift in the tractor, he was allowed. The tractor was being driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner and when it reached at Salempur Ghati, it collided with a Jeep No. RJ- 26-P-0546, which was also being driven by its driver in a very high speed. Due to the aforesaid accident, the N claimant sustained injuries. 3. Thereafter FIR was lodged, claim petition was filed, notices were issued, written statement was filed, issues were framed and the learned Tribunal vide its impugned award dated 1-5-2004 partly allowed the claim petition and decreed an amount of Rs. 85,000/- in favour of claimant and the said amount has been directed to be recovered from non- claimant Nos.3 to 5 and 6, while claim petition against non-claimant Nos. 1 and 2 has been dismissed. 4. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and award, the appellant-non-claimant No. 6 - National Insurance Company has filed the instant appeal. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant canvassed that the learned Tribunal has committed serious illegality while directing the appellant to pay the compensation amount and has ignored the law and fact that there was no privity of contract between the insurer and insured to cover the risk of such passengers in the tractor as the tractor is not meant for carrying passengers. The tractor was being insured only for agriculture purposes. The premium to cover the risk only of driver was charged and not to cover the risk of any passenger. In such circumstances, the direction regarding payment of the compensation against the appellant is absolutely erroneous and same is liable to be quashed and set aside against the appellant Insurance Company. He has further contended that as per the Registration certificate of the tractor, the sitting capacity in the tractor is only for one person i.e. driver. As per the pleadings and evidence of the appellant, Insurance Company it is clear that the claimant was travelling in the tractor by sitting over the mudguard. He has further contended that as per the Registration certificate of the tractor, the sitting capacity in the tractor is only for one person i.e. driver. As per the pleadings and evidence of the appellant, Insurance Company it is clear that the claimant was travelling in the tractor by sitting over the mudguard. As such the claimant himself was also negligent for the accident and no one can be held liable to pay compensation. The risk of such passenger was not covered under the Policy as no premium was charged for such passenger. He has further contended that in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Asha Rani, reported in 2002 (III) ACC (SC) 753: ( AIR 2003 SC 607 ) , in such type of cases, no liability can be cast upon the appellant Insurance Company. He has further contended that the driver was not having a valid and effective driving license at the time of the accident. Therefore, no liability can be fastened upon the Insurance Company. 6. E Converso, the learned counsel for the respondents defended the impugned award and stated the same to be just and apposite. 7. Having considered the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties and careful perused the impugned award, I deem it just and proper to modify the impugned award to the extent that recovery rights are given to the appellant-National Insurance Company against the owner of the offending vehicle. 8. For the reasons stated above, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned judgment and award dated 1-5-2004 is modified to the extent that recovery rights are given to the appellant - National Insurance Company against the owner of the offending vehicle. 9. Rest of the terms under the impugned award shall remain unchanged. 10. Consequent upon the disposal of appeal, the stay application, filed herewith, also stands disposed of.Appeal partly allowed. *******