accident was insured with the fifth respondent/fifth respondent but the Tribunal after taking into consideration of the Ex.P.5,Motor Vehicle Report came to conclusion that the vehicle was insured with the appellant/second respondent thereby fixed liability. Infact the vehicle was not insured with the second respondent on the date of accident and the fifth respondent also fairly admitted that the vehicle was insured with them. As per the admissions made by the learned counsel for the first respondent/petitioner and fifth respondent/fifth respondent that the first respondent vehicle was insured with the fifth respondent, it is appropriate to allow these appeals by fixing liability as against the fifth respondent/fifth respondent. Further the learned counsel appearing for the appellant has also produced copy of I.A. No. 470 of 2009 on the file of the Fast Track Court No.II, Madurai and in the above said MCOP No.2149 of 2005, wherein it is mentioned that lorry bearing Reg. No.TN 48 E 0388 was insured with New India Assurance Company Ltd., i.e., fifth respondent herein vide Cover Note No.384694(10.02.2005 to 09.02.2006) Further the learned counsel appearing for the appellant brought to the knowledge of the Court that he has deposited 50% of the amount and the same can be withdrawn by the appellant/second petitioner by filing appropriate petition before the Tribunal.
