VAIBHAV JAIN Vs. HINDUSTAN MOTORS PVT. LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) This appeal impugns the judgment and order of the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur(High Court) dtd. 15/11/2017, whereby Miscellaneous Appeal (Civil) No.1306 of 2007 filed by the appellant was dismissed and Miscellaneous Appeal (Civil) No.1147/2017 filed by the claimant(s) was allowed thereby enhancing the compensation already awarded to them.

(3.) At the outset, we would like to put on record that the Special Leave Petition (SLP) against the impugned order was filed by impleading six respondents. Respondents 1 to 4 (R­1 to R­4) were heirs and legal representatives of the deceased Pranay Kumar Goswami on whose accidental death the claim arose. Respondent no.5 (R­5), namely, Shubhashish Pal, was the person who drove the vehicle at the time of accident; and Respondent no.6 (R­6), namely, M/s Hindustan Motors, was the manufacturer of the vehicle. However, on 23/10/2018, this Court issued notice only to the manufacturer (R­6) (i.e., M/s Hindustan Motors) and the SLP was dismissed qua R­1 to R­5 by observing that the question raised in the matter is about the liability of the dealer (i.e., the appellant). Therefore, in our view, the impugned award has attained finality insofar as the rights of the claimant­respondents are concerned. In consequence, it appears, the Registry has shown M/s Hindustan Motors as the sole respondent though, initially, there were six respondents. Be that as it may to have a clear understanding of the matter, we shall describe the parties as they were described in the SLP at the time of its presentation.