JUDGMENT Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (Oral) By the medium of the present appeal, the insurer has questioned the award, dated 24th October, 2007, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(III), Shimla, H.P., (for short, the Tribunal), whereby Claim Petition No.77-S/2 of 2005/03, titled Kedar Singh vs. Rach Pal and others, came to be determined and compensation to the tune of Rs.1,60,000/-, with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, was awarded in favour of the Claimant and the insurer was saddled with the liability, with right of recovery, (for short, the impugned award). 2. The claimant, the owner/insured and the driver have not questioned the impugned award on any count, thus, the same has attained finality so far as it relates to them. It is also placed on record that the driver was proceeded against ex parte before the Tribunal. 3. The only controversy needs to be set at rest in this appeal is - Whether the insurer was rightly saddled with the liability? 4. The main thrust of argument of the learned counsel for the appellant was that the insured was in breach and was to be saddled with the liability. 5. The argument is not sustainable as it is beaten law of the land that the insurer has to satisfy the third party claims, but with a right to recover in such cases. 6. I have gone through the impugned award, is well reasoned and needs to be upheld. Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed. However, the appellant/insurer is at liberty to lay a motion for effecting recovery from the insured. 7. The Registry is directed to release the compensation amount in favour of the claimant strictly in terms of the impugned award, through payee’s account cheque.