JUDGMENT Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.R. Sen 1. This instant appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 is directed against the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Member-cum-Presiding Officer, MACT, Aizawl in MACT Case No. 14 of 2009. 2. The brief fact of the instant appeal in nutshell is that, deceased Lalthlengliana was travelling by a truck bearing No. MZ-01D-1069 and met with an accident and due to said accident deceased sustained injury and succumbed to his injury. 3. Thereafter, the wife of the deceased filed a compensation claim petition before the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal where Appellant M/s United India Insurance Co. Ltd. was made a party as the said truck was insured with the said Company. The learned Tribunal after completion of all the process and after recording the evidence come to conclusion and awarded compensation for a sum of Rs. 2,73,500/-in favour of the claimant. On being aggrieved by the said judgment and order and award, appellant/opposite party No. 2 preferred this appeal before this court. 4. Learned counsel Mr. A.R. Malhotra, appeared for and on behalf of the appellant, M/s United India Insurance Co. Ltd. submitted that in this instant case only one ground need to be decided was whether deceased was traveling in the said truck as passenger or in other capacity as the said truck was goods carrier truck not a passenger vehicle and if he traveled as a passenger then Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation. In spite of raising this question before learned Tribunal, learned Tribunal did not redress this particular issue while awarding the compensation by the judgment dated 5.07.2011. Hence, this appeal. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/claimant Mr. Vanlalnghaka submitted that deceased was not a passenger at that point of time as he hired the vehicle to carry his own timber which has come on evidence. As such, Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation under section 147(1)(b)(i) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. 6. Both the learned counsel at bar agreed that learned Tribunal while deciding the case did not specifically determine, whether deceased was a mere passenger or hired the truck bearing Registration No. MZ-01-D-1069 for carrying his timber. As such, Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation under section 147(1)(b)(i) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. 6. Both the learned counsel at bar agreed that learned Tribunal while deciding the case did not specifically determine, whether deceased was a mere passenger or hired the truck bearing Registration No. MZ-01-D-1069 for carrying his timber. After hearing both the submissions forwarded by learned counsels at bar and on perusal of the impugned judgment and order dated 5.7.2011, I find that the learned court below did not mention specifically whether deceased was a mere passenger or hired vehicle for carrying goods/timber when the accident occurred. Therefore, I feel that it will be appropriate that the instant case is required to remand back to the Tribunal to decide on the issue of "whether deceased was a mere passenger or hired the truck bearing Registration No. MZ-01-D/1069 for carrying timber/goods" and to complete the Trial within a month positively after hearing of both the sides from the date of receipt of the record. 7. Registry is directed to return Rs.25,000/- deposited by the Insurance Company at the time of filing appeal to concerned Insurance Company by cheque. 8. Registry is directed to send the lower case record alongwith a copy of this judgment and order immediately. 9. Both the learned counsel is requested to pursue the matter before the learned Tribunal immediately. 10. With this observation and direction the instant appeal is allowed and disposed of. Appeal allowed