SYED PATEL Vs. N H DODDABASAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M.F.A. No. 194 of 1979 is by the driver of the vehicle and is directed against the judgment and award dated 23-10-78 passed by the District Judge and Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Raichur, in Miscellaneous (MVC) Case No. 4 of 1977, on his file, awarding a sum of Rs. 6,000 as compensation from the driver.

(2.) A girl of 6 years died as the result of the accident that happened on 1-12-76 at 4.30 P.M." on Raichur Sindh- noor Main Road. The Tribunal has held that the accident was the result of rash and negligent driving of the lorry bearing No. MYR 5059 by its driver. Having held so, the Tribunal fixed the compensation at Rs. 6,000 for the death of a girl aged six years. But, while giving the award, the Tribunal fixed the liability only against the driver of the vehicle and the same is challenged in this appeal before us.

(3.) It is no doubt true that in the case of a vehicle, which is the subject-matter of hire purchase agreement, the person, who is actually in possession of the vehicle, is responsible and liable for any damage arising out of the accident in the use of the vehicle. In the instant case, the hirer is rightly styled as the owner, as contemplated under the Motor Vehicles Act. He is made respondent-1 in the original petition. The driver was employed by the said owner and the accident occurred in the course of the employment of the driver under the said owner. It is, therefore, obvious that the owner and driver are both liable. The driver is liable because of primary liability in committing ' the accident. The owner, namely, the hirer, is liable vicariously. Since the owner is liable, the Insurance Company is bound to make good or indemnify the liability that is saddled on the owner. Hence, the owner, driver and the Insurance Company are all liable to pay the compensation. The Tribunal is, therefore, in error in fixing the liability only against the driver.