(1.) The insurance company has preferred an appeal against the judgment and order, dtd. 13/9/2012 in MAC Case No.182/2004 passed by the learned Additional District Judge FTC No.2/Member, MACT, Kamrup, Guwahati.
(2.) This appeal has been filed on the ground that the learned Additional District Judge FTC No.2/ Member, MACT Kamrup did not take into consideration the following facts while directing the appellant insurance company to pay the awarded amount with a liberty to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle:
(3.) According to learned counsel for the appellant, the person driving the vehicle is not a third party and therefore the Member, MACT ought not have taken recourse to the remedy pay and recovery.