RAJINDER KUMAR Vs. NEELAM GADHOK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal arises out of the interim order dated 30/05/2003 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Delhi.

(2.) THE facts of the case in nutshell for proper appreciation of the matter are as follows:

(3.) SH. O. P Wadhwa, counsel for the appellant has assailed the interim order dated 30/05/2003 on the ground that the learned tribunal failed to appreciate that the appellant Sh. Rajinder Kumar had sold the vehicle on 5. 5. 1996 to respondent No. 6 Sh. Ashok Kumar and had sent the intimation of the same to the concerned R. T. O. on 10. 5. 1996, therefore, the appellant was not the owner of the offending vehicle on the date of the accident and thus Sh. Ashok kumar alone is liable to pay the interim compensation and not the appellant. The counsel further submitted that the tribunal failed to properly appreciate the facts of the case reported in 2001 VIII AD (SC) 168 entitled Dr. T. V. Jose v. Chakko P. M. , which are totally dissimilar to the facts of the present case. In the instant case, not only the intimation of the sale of the vehicle was sent to the transport authority but even the purchaser of the vehicle, Sh. Ashok Kumar was a party to the proceedings before the trial court. The counsel for the appellant has relied on the judgment entitled sumathy and Ors. v. Raghavan and Ors. , 1997 ACJ 260 (Her) (DB ).