JUDGMENT : Rumi Kumari Phukan, J. Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondents despite the name of learned counsel is shown in the cause list. 2. The United Insurance Co. Ltd. has preferred the present appeal against the judgment and award passed by the learned Member, MACT, Barpeta, in MAC Case No.311/2010, dated 16.10.2012. 3. A claim petition was preferred under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, by three claimants praying for compensation for the death of Kibrali Hussain @ Kibrahim, who died as a result of a motor vehicle accident that took place at about 11:40 A.M. on 28.01.2010 at Deulkuchi, while the deceased was going in a Auto Rickshwa No.AS-14 A/8637 and the vehicle met with an accident at Deulkuchi under Tamulpur Police Station. As a result of the accident, he sustained serious injuries on his person and subsequently succumbed to his injury on 01.02.2010. At the time of his death, the deceased left behind his wife and two sons and he was the sole earning member of the family. Hence a claim petition was preferred praying for compensation on account of death of said Kibrali Hussain @ Kibrahim, in the motor vehicle accident and the incident occurred due to rush and negligent driving of the vehicle. 4. Both the driver and owner as well as the Insurance Co. contested the case by filing their written statements. In their written statement, the driver and owner has contended that the vehicle was driving by the driver by holding valid driving license and the vehicle was duly insured with the United Insurance Co. Ltd. So liability if any is to be indemnified by the Insurance Co. They have denied the allegations as such. 5. The plea of the Insurance Co. was that they are not liable to pay any compensation if there is any violation of policy condition and other material discrepancy in the case. 6. The learned Tribunal after framing the issues and examination of the witnesses, comes to the findings that the accident occurred due to rush and negligent driving of the offending vehicle/Auto Rickshwa and by taking into age and income, etc. of the deceased, awarded the claimants a sum of Rs. 4,95,000/- along with 6% interest per annum, from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization, as compensation. 7. of the deceased, awarded the claimants a sum of Rs. 4,95,000/- along with 6% interest per annum, from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization, as compensation. 7. While deciding the question of liability as to who is to pay the amount of compensation, the learned counsel for the appellant has relied on the evidence adduced by the Insurance Co. The witness was examined by the Insurance Co./DW.1 has proved the report from the DTO, Nalbari that no such driving license was issued to the said driver and accordingly it was held that the driver has no such effective driving license and it was a fake one. Accordingly it was held that as the opposite party/driver had no valid and effective license at the material time of the accident and the owner of the vehicle willfully allowed such driver to drive the vehicle, so the owner has violated the conditions of the insurance policy and he cannot escape the liability in regard to the third party risk. Otherwise, the insurance policy was valid as regards the owner. 8. Accordingly the Tribunal find and held that the Insurance Co. will pay the said awarded amount to the claimants along with the interest as stated above and the same can be recovered from the insurer/owner of the offending vehicle No.AS-14 A/8637. 9. The present appeal is preferred by the Insurance Co. to challenge the said award on the ground that they have no liability whatsoever to indemnify the insurer, as admittedly there is a clear violation of the policy condition, in terms of Section 149 of the Motor Vehicle Act. 10. Today none has appeared for the respondents despite the matter was fixed for hearing. So the learned counsel for the appellant is heard. 11. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the entire awarded amount has already been deposited before the Registry of this Court and the claimants have already withdrawn the amount in the meantime. So they may be permitted to realise the amount from the owner of the vehicle, as directed by the Tribunal. 12. It is no more res integra that in a case of third party risk, the insurer is to indemnify the insured, for which the learned Tribunal has directed the Insurance Co. to indemnify the award. So they may be permitted to realise the amount from the owner of the vehicle, as directed by the Tribunal. 12. It is no more res integra that in a case of third party risk, the insurer is to indemnify the insured, for which the learned Tribunal has directed the Insurance Co. to indemnify the award. But there is also clear evidence on record that the driver do not have a valid driving license at the time of accident and the owner/driver failed to disprove it. 13. Taking into note of all the above, the appeal stands disposed of with liberty to the appellant/Insurance Company to recover the aforesaid awarded amount from the owner of the vehicle i.e. Auto Rickshwa No.AS-14 A/8637, in accordance with law as per the award. 14. Return the LCR forthwith along with a copy of this order.