JUDGMENT Appeal is called out for admission hearing. The operative part contains directions to pay compensation of Rs.5,35,6061-. Sub clause (iii) of order reads as follows: "(iii) Respondent No.2 - Insurance Company shall be entitled to recover the amount deposited by it towards award from respondent No. 1 M/s. Sandeep Transport Pvt. Ltd." 2. Oral submissions as well as perusal of the judgment reveals the appellant's contention to be as follows: (a) The Insurance company's plea that since the tanker lorry which was involved in the incident was not a passengers vehicle, passengers could not have legally travelled in it. Third party liability which was covered by the insurance policy, did not cover the indemnity of liability towards fare paying passenger. Thus the passenger was being carried in violation of the terms of policy (b) Notwithstanding accepting insurance company's plea, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal passed order on the principle of first pay and recover. 3. It is seen on perusal of judgment that for the course adopted by it, learned Tribunal has placed reliance on following judgments: (a) National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Swaransingh - 2004(1) T.A.C. 321(S.C) (b) British India General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Captain Itbar Singh and Ors. (1960)1 S.C.R. 168 (c) Kashiram Yadav & Anr. vs. Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. (1989) 4 S.C.C. 128 4. Now, it is clear that the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, is based on law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court which governs the field and is binding on all courts including this court. 5. Now, therefore the limited question to be considered by this court is as to whether the judgment passed by the Tribunal can be denoted to be contrary to law. 6. In the background that the judgment of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is based on law of precedent, which is consistently followed, this court finds that there is no error or illegality in the impugned judgment. 7. This is an appeal of civil nature. In civil appeal the litigant has to show that a judgment under appeal is contrary to law, equity and good conscience or contrary to facts duly proved. None amongst these factors exist in the present case. 8. In the result, appeal does not involve any merit, and deserves to be dismissed and hence, it is dismissed. Appeal dismissed.