HDFC BANK LTD Vs. DHIRUBHAI BHIKHABHAI SOLANKI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule in Special Civil Application. Service of rule is waived by Mr. Thakker, Ld. Advocate for the respondent nos. 2 and 3.

(2.) Both these matters are filed by the common litigant, namely HDFC Bank Ltd., [for short 'the Bank'] since by impugned order dated 17/7/2014 below exh. 5 in M.A.C. Petition No. 156/2012, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal [Main], Bhavnagar [for short 'the Tribunal'] has made it liable to pay compensation to the heirs of the victim of road accident though the Bank is not registered owner of the vehicle in question, which was involved in the accident. Therefore, in First Appeal, the Bank has challenged the order dated 17/7/2014 passed below exh. 5 by the Tribunal. Whereas in Special Civil Application [for short 'the petition'], which was preferred earlier in time to the First Appeal, the Bank has challenged the order below exh. 25 in the same M.A.C. Petition No. 156/2012 by the same Tribunal, whereby Bank's application at exh. 25 to delete it from the proceedings has been rejected holding that the Bank is liable and responsible to pay compensation to the victim and/or his legal heirs being owner of the vehicle involved in the accident. Though such order has been challenged in petition on 10/9/2014 and though this Court has on 11/9/2014 granted interim relief in terms of para 7 [C], whereby only execution and implementation of the order dated 17/7/2014 below exh. 25 in M.A.C. Petition No. 156/2012 was stayed; however, when it does not restrict the Tribunal to decide the claim petition finally, the Tribunal has decided the claim petition also.

(3.) Considering above facts whereby it is clear and certain that in both the matters, the issue involved is common that whether hypothecator of the motor vehicle can be treated as an owner so as to make it liable and responsible for payment of compensation to the victim/ claimants of the M.A.C. Petition under the Motor Vehicles Act or not.