JUDGMENT : R.P. Dholaria, J. 1. This group of eighteen appeals is filed by appellant - National Insurance Company Limited against the common judgment & award dated 31.1.2007 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fast Track Court No. 5, Ahmedabad (Rural) in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 1345 of 1997 & other group petitions. The appellant was insurer of Matador No. GJ-01-TT-7318 which is admittedly a goods carriage vehicle wherein the injured claimants as well as deceased were travelling on the day of accident which had taken place on 10.7.1997. The said goods carriage vehicle was collided with one truck No. GJ-12-U-8834 insured with another insurance company i.e. New India Assurance Company Limited. It is a case of claimants that due to said accident, all persons who were travelling in said goods carriage vehicle sustained injuries and some of them succumbed to injuries. The several claim petitions came to be filed by victims of said accident. Learned Tribunal vide its impugned common judgment was pleased to allow all claim petitions whereby learned Tribunal has directed appellant to pay 30% of awarded amount and rest 70% of awarded amount to be paid by New India Assurance Company Ltd. 2. Learned Advocate Mr. Maulik Shelat for the appellant submitted that once learned Tribunal has found that all persons travelling in said goods carriage vehicle at time of accident were passengers then as per the provisions of Section 147 of Motor Vehicles Act and as per the decision of the Honorable Apex Court in the case of New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Asha Rani, reported in (2003) 2 SCC 223 and catena of decisions, appellant insurer of said goods carriage vehicle could not have held liable to pay compensation. He has further submitted that learned Tribunal has committed an error of law by directing the appellant to pay 30% of awarded amount to claimants and then the appellant is entitled to recover the same from the owner of goods carriage vehicle. According to him, learned Tribunal has no power under law to give such direction as there was no statutory liability cast upon the appellant to pay compensation to passengers travelling in goods carriage vehicle. In support of his argument, he has relied upon the recent decision dated 18.11.2013 of this Court delivered in First Appeal No. 2121 of 2008. According to Mr. In support of his argument, he has relied upon the recent decision dated 18.11.2013 of this Court delivered in First Appeal No. 2121 of 2008. According to Mr. Shelat, as per the settled legal position of law, the appellant could not have been held liable to pay compensation and then to recover it from the owner of goods carriage vehicle. 3. On the other-hand, Mr. Hiren Modi and Mr. Paresh Darji, learned advocates appearing for the respective claimants have supported the impugned judgment of learned Tribunal. They have submitted that the deceased and injured claimants were travelling in goods carriage vehicle and it is a case of composite negligence for claimants as none of claimants were driver/tort-feasors of vehicles involved in the accident. So, according to learned advocates for the claimants, even if appellant will not be held liable to pay compensation, in that case, as per principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in its recent decision in the case of Khenyei Vs. New India Assurance Company Limited, reported in (2015) 9 SCC 273 , claimants can recover the entire compensation from any of tort-feasors including New India Assurance Company Limited. They further submitted that if this Court comes to the conclusion that the appellant is not at all liable to pay compensation, in that event, this Court may pass appropriate order by which either the claimants will be entitled to receive 30% of awarded amount so deposited by the appellant from New India Assurance Company Limited or the appellant insurance company may recover 30% of awarded amount so deposited by it in tribunal from another insurance company. 4. Learned advocate Mr. Palak Thakker appearing for New India Assurance Company Limited has supported the impugned judgment. However, he has fairly submitted that in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the decisions and the judgment of this Court referred herein above, learned Tribunal could not have passed an order of pay and recover compensation against the appellant. Palak Thakker appearing for New India Assurance Company Limited has supported the impugned judgment. However, he has fairly submitted that in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the decisions and the judgment of this Court referred herein above, learned Tribunal could not have passed an order of pay and recover compensation against the appellant. Nonetheless, he has submitted that in a case this Court will completely exonerates the appellant from making payment of award amount of its liability to the extent of 30% and directs New India Assurance Company Limited to pay said amount to the claimants and then to recover such 30% of award amount from owner of Matador as per recent judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Khenyei (supra) by passing appropriate order. 5. Heard learned advocate for the respective parties at length and considered submissions advanced by all the advocates. 6. The common question which arise for consideration of this Court in these batch of appeals, whether learned Tribunal is justified in law by directing appellant insurance company to pay compensation to claimants and then to recover it from its insured-owner of goods carriage vehicle?. 7. The issue involved in these appeals is no more res integra. It is by now well settled legal position of law that once learned Tribunal founds a person travelling in goods carriage vehicle as passenger and not owner of goods or its representative, in such situation, insurer of goods carriage vehicle is not liable to pay compensation and learned Tribunal cannot fasten the liability upon the insurer to pay compensation and then to recover it from its insured. On going through the particulars of the policy, it can be noticed that no additional premium is being paid by the insured to the insurer for coverage of risk of any passenger travelling upon the vehicle involved in the accident. The risk of passenger travelling in goods carriage vehicle is not covered under Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. The Act has not envisaged risk of passenger to be covered under section 147 of Act and law in this regard has been declared by the Hon'ble Apex Court in a case of Asha Rani (supra) and reiterated in other decisions. It is an admitted fact that deceased and injured claimants were travelling as passengers in said goods carriage vehicle insured with appellant insurance company. It is an admitted fact that deceased and injured claimants were travelling as passengers in said goods carriage vehicle insured with appellant insurance company. This finding of fact is not questioned by anyone including claimants. In this view of the matter, this court is of the opinion that appellant insurance company is not liable to pay compensation and learned Tribunal has committed an error of law by directing appellant to pay 30% of award amount to claimants and then the same to be recovered from its insured-owner of goods carriage vehicle. 8. This Court has examined aspect of composite negligence and considered submissions advanced by learned advocates for the claimants. It is an admitted fact that the deceased and injured claimants were passengers in goods carriage vehicle and due to negligence on the part of both the drivers of vehicles, they have either sustained injuries or succumbed to it. Under the circumstances, it is a case of composite negligence for claimants who have a choice of recovery of entire compensation from any of tort-feasors. This Court is of the considered opinion that learned Tribunal has committed an error by apportioning liability to the extent of 70:30 to pay compensation amongst original opponents-joint tort-feasors. The law on this issue is also no longer res integra in view of recent judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in a case of Khenyei (supra). Thus, this Court is of the opinion that all original opponents except present appellant insurance company are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to claimants. It is open for claimants to recover entire compensation from any of original opponents except present appellant insurance company. 9. I have been informed by learned advocate Mr. Shelat that as per ad-interim order dated 16.7.2007 passed by this Court in stay applications, the appellant has deposited 30% of awarded amount - its liability before learned Tribunal and as per the order dated 24.8.2007 confirming ad-interim relief, this Court has permitted claimants to get 10% amount in cash and remaining 90% of amount is ordered to be invested in FDR. Hence, Mr. Shelat has requested this Court to permit appellant insurance company to recover amount so deposited by it before learned Tribunal in pursuance of the said order passed by this Court from New India Assurance Company Limited with interest accrued thereon. Hence, Mr. Shelat has requested this Court to permit appellant insurance company to recover amount so deposited by it before learned Tribunal in pursuance of the said order passed by this Court from New India Assurance Company Limited with interest accrued thereon. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and orders passed by this court in stay applications, appellant insurance company is entitled to recover the amount so deposited by it before learned Tribunal in respective claim petition being 30% of awarded amount from New India Assurance Company Limited along with interest accrued thereon till realization. As per decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in a case of Khenyei (supra), on making payment of said amount to appellant insurance company, it is open for New India Assurance Company to recover such amount from Driver/Owner of Matador No. GJ-1-TT-7318 by filling an execution proceeding before the learned Tribunal. 10. In view of the above stated reasons, these appeals are allowed. The impugned common judgment and award is quashed and set aside qua appellant only. The original opponents except appellant insurance company are liable to pay compensation jointly and severally. As stated herein above, appellant insurance company is entitled to recover amount so deposited by it before learned Tribunal in respective claim petition being 30% of awarded amount from New India Assurance Company Limited along with interest accrued thereon till realization. At the same time, on making payment of said amount to the appellant insurance company, it is open for the New India Assurance Company to recover such amount from Driver/Owner of Matador No. GJ-1-TT-7318 by filling an execution proceeding against them before learned Tribunal. The amount which is lying in FDR is ordered to be released in favour of respective claimants after its proper identification and verification. It is made clear that if any amount is lying before the Registry of this Court in these appeals, the same shall be transmitted to learned Tribunal forthwith. R & P be sent back to the concerned lower court forthwith. No order as to costs.