ORDER : 1. The petitioner being the owner of the offending vehicle which was involved in an accident leading to the death of one Pankaj Kumar is before us by way of this special leave petition assailing the judgment dated 17th April, 2025 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi. The High Court, by the said judgment had dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the judgment and award dated 13th January, 2022 passed by the District Judge-V-cum-Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bokaro in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 133 of 2018. The aforesaid claim case was allowed in favour of the claimants and compensation to the tune of Rs.12,39,360/-along with interest of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim i.e., from 10th December, 2018 till realization was awarded to the claimants being the legal heirs of Pankaj Kumar on account of his death in the vehicular accident. Respondent No. 1-Insurance Company was directed to reimburse the awarded amount to the claimants and was given liberty to recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle that is the petitioner herein. 2. The direction to pay and recover was given by the Tribunal on the premise that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid licence to drive a transport vehicle at the time of the accident. Admittedly, the offending vehicle owned by the petitioner was a turbo truck. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of this Court in Mukund Dewangan v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (2017) 14 SCC 663 , in order to urge that since the driver of the offending vehicle was holding a valid licence for driving a light motor vehicle as such the vehicle owner cannot be held to be in violation of the policy conditions. 4. We find the said argument to be fallacious. If, at all, the petitioner was desirous of taking advantage of the judgment in the case of Mukund Dewangan (supra), he would have to satisfy the Court that the unladen weight of the offending vehicle was less than 7500 Kgs. It may be noted that the petitioner did not contest the claim petition and was set ex-parte. If, at all, the petitioner was desirous of taking advantage of the judgment in the case of Mukund Dewangan (supra), he would have to satisfy the Court that the unladen weight of the offending vehicle was less than 7500 Kgs. It may be noted that the petitioner did not contest the claim petition and was set ex-parte. There is not even a whisper of an averment in the pleadings of the petitioner either before the High Court or before this Court that the unladen weight of the vehicle was less than 7500 Kgs. 5. Thus, we find no merit in this special leave petition which is dismissed as such. 6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.