POONAM Vs. ARVIND PARAMANIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging the Award dtd. 16/1/2019 passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Pilot Court), Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') in DAR No. 345/2018 titled Sh. Arvind Pramanik v. Sh.Aman &Ors., allowing the Claim Petition of the respondent no.1 herein, and awarding a sum of Rs.9,65,154.00 in favour of the respondent no.1 along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the realization of the compensation amount. The appellant, however, has been granted the right to recover the compensation amount paid by her to the respondent no.1, from the respondent no.3 herein.

(2.) It is the case of the appellant that she had transferred the offending vehicle, being the car bearing registration no. DL 7 CE 3484, in favour of the respondent no.3 herein on 27/3/2018. The accident occurred only thereafter on 19/6/2018. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that based on the transfer documents, in fact, the vehicle was transferred in favour of the respondent no.3 on 24/8/2018. He submits that, therefore, the learned Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in fastening the liability to pay the compensation amount to the respondent no.1 on the appellant herein.

(3.) I am unable to agree with the challenge laid by the appellant to the Impugned Award. Admittedly, as on the date of the accident, the appellant continued to be shown as the registered owner of the offending vehicle with the Registration Authority. In Naveen Kumar v. Vijay Kumar and Ors., (2018) 3 SCC 1, the Supreme Court has held that the owner under Sec. 2(30) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is the person in whose name the vehicle stands registered with the Registration Authority. I may quote the relevant extract from the judgment as under:-