Judgment : The insurance company filed this appeal challenging the award dated 29.03.2005 passed in O.P.No.286 of 2002 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC) Medak at Sangareddy (for short ‘the Tribunal’). The claimant filed the claim petition claiming a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in motor accident. The parties hereinafter referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience. The brief facts of the case are as follows: On 23.02.2000, the claimant along with his family members was traveling in the lorry bearing No.AP-9-V-2017 from Sangareddy to Appajipally to attend a marriage function. When the lorry reached near Shivampet at about 09.30 AM another lorry bearing No.AAT-4377 came in opposite direction, being driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner at high speed dashed against the lorry bearing No.AP-9-V-2017, as a result of which the claimant and others sustained injuries. The claimant was shifted to Government Hospital, Sangareddy, from there he was shifted to Private Nursing Home for better treatment. The 1st respondent is the owner of the lorry bearing No.AP-9-V-2017. The 3rd respondent is the owner of the lorry bearing No.AAT-4377. Respondent Nos.2 and 4 are the insurance company with which both the vehicles were insured as on the date of the accident. The only contention of the learned counsel for the insurance company is that the injured was traveling in a goods vehicle, he was an unauthorized passenger and that there is violation of terms and conditions of the policy. Where in a case it is alleged that there is violation of terms and conditions of the policy, it becomes a dispute between the insurance company and the owner of the vehicle. A policy is an agreement between the insurance company and the owner of the vehicle, both are bound by the terms and conditions of the policy, they cannot bind any other third party. In this case, injured is a third party. A policy is an agreement between the insurance company and the owner of the vehicle, both are bound by the terms and conditions of the policy, they cannot bind any other third party. In this case, injured is a third party. Therefore, the injured cannot be denied compensation on the ground that the owner of the vehicle had violated the terms and conditions of the policy, if at all owner of the vehicle had violated the terms and conditions of the policy and the driver had allowed any unauthorized person to travel in the lorry, the insurance company has to prove the said fact as a separate issue in a proceeding between the insurance company and the owner of the vehicle and in case where violations have been proved and it is held that owner of the vehicle had knowingly and willfully violated the terms and conditions of the policy, then, the insurance company should recover the amount from the owner of the vehicle. Therefore, as and when the insurance company receives information about any accident, it should verify whether there are any violations of terms and conditions of the policy. If the insurance company comes to a conclusion that there are violations of terms and conditions of the policy, then it should take immediate steps to see that the property of the owner of the vehicle is attached so that it will be in a position to recover the same at later stage from him. As far as third parties are concerned, unfortunately they would not be in a position to know whether the owner had violated the terms and conditions of the policy or whether the driver was having valid driving license or not at the time of accident. In this country, there are no sufficient transport facilities, the roads are not in a good condition, people have to wait hours together to go to any near by town from a remote village. Since there are lack of transport facilities provided by the State, people are forced to travel in private vehicles. Even there are no sufficient private passenger vehicles. As and when the drivers are allowing any person to travel in the lorry or in goods vehicle, it is the duty of the State Officials to prevent such practices. Since there are lack of transport facilities provided by the State, people are forced to travel in private vehicles. Even there are no sufficient private passenger vehicles. As and when the drivers are allowing any person to travel in the lorry or in goods vehicle, it is the duty of the State Officials to prevent such practices. There are several check posts and police stations, but no Official including police and Transport Department Officials is taking care to see that no person is allowed to travel in a goods vehicle. No regular checks are conducted by those officials. The insurance company is also not taking any steps. No instance has come to our knowledge till day to show that any insurance company has cancelled the policy of the owner of the vehicle for allowing a person to travel in the goods vehicle or for any other violations of terms and conditions of the policy. Even political parties engage lorries to bring public to their meetings and superior police and transport officials look after the law and order in such meetings. We have not heard any insurance company deploying any of its officials to prevent any violations by the owners of the vehicles at any check post. In fact, the insurance companies and the concerned officials and the concerned Government should think seriously about these issues and take necessary steps. It may not be out of place to mention that even where the legal position has been well settled the insurance companies have been filing appeals. They must calculate the amount spent on such appeals or at least make a sample survey to know how much amount is paid by those companies in the name of interest and how much money is wasted in the name of filing appeals. The Officials of insurance companies on the other hand say that their money is public money. They must also check in how many fraudulent claims they are paying huge amounts. When it is an open secret and known to everybody, nobody is taking care to prevent such practices, then, it will be great injustice if the victims of road accident are denied compensation merely on the ground that the owner of the vehicle had violated the terms and conditions of the policy. When it is an open secret and known to everybody, nobody is taking care to prevent such practices, then, it will be great injustice if the victims of road accident are denied compensation merely on the ground that the owner of the vehicle had violated the terms and conditions of the policy. Since the dispute as to whether violation of terms and conditions of the policy is between the owner of the vehicle and the insurance company, the insurance company should lead the evidence and prove such violation in separate proceedings and recover the amount from the owner of the vehicle. In view of the above discussions, I find no merits in the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. No costs. However, the rate of interest is 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand closed.