LAWS(KER)-2013-7-127

SREEKUMAR Vs. ABDEEN

Decided On July 08, 2013
SREEKUMAR Appellant
V/S
ABDUL RASHEED Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A question of inter se dispute between the registered owner and the de facto owner of the offending vehicle and right of the registered owner to recover compensation paid to the injured from the de facto owner in a proceeding initiated by the injured before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short, "the Tribunal") is required to be decided in this appeal. It is not disputed and proved that the first respondent suffered injuries in a motor accident involving a scooter on 31.5.2004. The Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the 3rd respondent riding that scooter in a rash and negligent manner. The vehicle had no insurance coverage. The appellant contended that he had transferred the vehicle to Shine, S/o. Balakrishnan as per Ext. B1 on 25.10.1998. The second respondent purchased the said vehicle from Shine in the year, 2000. The appellant claimed that he is not liable to pay compensation to the first respondent.

(2.) The Tribunal referred to the relevant documents concerning transfer of the vehicle to Shine and the second respondent and observed in paragraph 12 of the a ward that since the appellant continued to be the registered owner of the vehicle on the date of accident he cannot escape liability. The appellant and the respondents 2 and 3 were made liable to pay compensation to the first respondent.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant contends that in view of bar of jurisdiction of the Civil Court under S. 175 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, "the Act"), inter se dispute between the appellant and the second respondent regarding transfer of the vehicle is to be decided by the Tribunal. If it is found that there was a transfer of the vehicle prior to the accident, may be the registered owner continues to be liable to the 3rd parties but the registered owner is entitled to recover the amount if realised from him from the real owner. The learned counsel has placed reliance on the decisions in Dr. T.V. Jose v. Chacko P.M. @ Thankachan & Ors., 2001 8 SCC 748, National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Singh, 2004 1 KerLT 781 , National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Baljit Kaur, 2004 2 SCC 1 , P.P. Mohammed v. K. Rajappan & Ors., 2008 17 SCC 624 and Pushpa @ Leela & Ors. v. Shakuntala & Ors., 2011 2 SCC 240 .