JUDGMENT 1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant -Insurance Company against the judgment and awarded dated 28.07.2000 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhilwara in MAC Case No. 182/1993, whereby, an amount of Rs. 1,59,000/- was awarded to the respondents-claimants. 2. Brief facts of the case are that in the accident which occurred on 06.12.1992, Tirathraj who was traveling in Truck No. DNG 1650 as a second driver fell into A/a/a, on account of which he sustained fatal injuries, due to which he died. In the circumstances, the respondents-claimants preferred the claim petition before the learned Tribunal. 3. Learned Tribunal after framing the issues, evaluating the evidence and hearing the counsel for the parties, partly allowed the claim petition with a direction to the appellant-Insurance Company to compensate the respondents-claimants by paying the compensation amount to the tune of Rs.1,59,000/-. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant fairly submits that as far as the quantum and other factors taken into consideration by the Tribunal in the judgment and award dated 28.07.2000 are concerned, the same are not disputed. However, he submits that the learned Tribunal has fastened the liability to satisfy the award against the appellant, which is not correct. He submits that the cheque given by the Owner of the Truck towards the premium was dishonoured on account of 'insufficiency of funds', therefore, the Insurance Company was not paid the premium for covering the risk in furtherance of the insurance cover note issued in the present case. 6. Learned counsel further submits that although, the notice for cancellation of the insurance policy was given after the accident but the Tribunal erred while giving direction for satisfying the award to the insurance company without giving them any opportunity to recover the same from the owner and driver of the offending vehicle. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United India Insurance Co. Ltd. V/s Laxmamma & Ors., reported in (2012) 5 SCC 234 . Since nobody has appeared on behalf of the driver and owner of the Truck, the contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant are not opposed. 7. Ltd. V/s Laxmamma & Ors., reported in (2012) 5 SCC 234 . Since nobody has appeared on behalf of the driver and owner of the Truck, the contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant are not opposed. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents-claimants, however, submits that in pursuance of the direction issued by the Tribunal, the compensation awarded has already been received by them. 8. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and have gone through the judgment and award impugned. 9. As per the findings arrived at by the learned Tribunal with respect to the Issue No.4, it is an admitted position that the accident in the present case occurred on 06.12.1992 and cover note was issued on 05.12.1992. For the purpose, the owner of the vehicle submitted a cheque before 06.12.1992. The cheque was dishonoured after the accident and therefore, the notice for cancellation of the policy was also issued after the date of accident. In the circumstances, the appellant-Insurance Company was under the obligation to satisfy the compensation awarded in this case. However, in the light of judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United India Insurance Co. Ltd. V/s Laxmamma & Ors. (Supra), the appellant is entitle to recover the same from the driver and owner of the offending vehicle. 10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United India Insurance Co. Ltd. V/s Laxmamma & Ors.(Supra) has held as under :- 26. In our view, the legal position in this: where the policy of insurance is issued by an authorised insurer on receipt of cheque towards the payment of premium and such a cheque is returned dishonoured, the liability of the authorised insurer to indemnify the third parties in respect of the liability which that policy covered subsists and it has to satisfy the award of compensation by reason of the provisions of Section 147(5) and 149(1) of the M.V. Act unless the policy of insurance is cancelled by the authorised insurer and intimation of such cancellation has reached the insured before the accident. In other words, where the policy of insurance is issued by an authorised insurer to cover a vehicle on receipt of the cheque paid towards premium and the cheque gets dishonoured and before the accident of the vehicle occurs, such insurance company cancels the policy of insurance and sends intimation thereof to the owner, the insurance company's liability to indemnify the third parties which that policy covered ceases and the insurance company is not liable to satisfy awards of compensation in respect thereof. 27. having regard to the above legal position, insofar as the facts of the present case are concerned, the owner of the bus obtained the policy of insurance from the insurer for the period 16.04.2004 to 15.04.2005 for which premium was paid through cheque on 14.04.2004. The accident occurred on 11.05.2004. It was only thereafter that the insurer cancelled the insurance policy by communication dated 13.05.2004 on the ground of dishonour of cheque which was received by the owner of the vehicle on 21.05.2004. The cancellation of policy having been done by the insurer after the accident, the insurer became liable to satisfy the award of compensation passed in favour of the claimants. 28. In view of the above, the judgment of the High Court impugned in the appeal does not call for any interference. The civil appeal is dismissed. However, the insurer shall be at liberty to prosecute its remedy to recover the amount paid to the claimants from the insured. No order as to costs." 11. Thus, in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United India Insurance Co. Ltd. V/s Laxmamma s& Ors.(Supra), the appellant is entitled to recover the compensation from the driver and owner of the Truck in accordance with law. 12. In view of the discussions made above, the present appeal is disposed of with a direction that the appellant shall be at liberty to prosecute its remedy to recover the amount paid to the claimants from the insured. No order as to costs.