SADRUDIN GULAMHUSSEIN Vs. CHAMPABEN MAGANLAL GOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri R.H. Mehta, learned counsel for the appellants Sadruddin Gulamhussein and the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. It is to be noted that driver of the offending vehicle, namely, Karam Osman Sumra was originally joined as party appellant no.1, but during pendency of this appeal, he has been transposed as party respondent no.5.

(2.) The appellants have filed this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 10.9.81 made by the learned Member, M.A.C. Tribunal, Jamnagar in M.A.C. Case No. 76/80 contenting inter alia, that no negligence could be contributed against the truck no. GTG 1739 or its driver, that is, respondent no.5.

(3.) In view of the observations made by the Supreme Court in the judgment in the matter of H.S. Ahmmed Hussain v. Irfan Ahmed, reported in AIR 2002 SC 2483, it would be clear that joint appeal would be maintainable only after the name of the Insurance Company is deleted. In the present matter, the appeal has, in fact, been filed by the Insurance Company and if all latitude is given in favour of the owner and the Insurance Company is transposed as party respondent, then too, appeal would not be maintainable, because, owner-appellant would not be allowed to fight for the interest of the Insurance Company. The appellant owner would have no cause of action, because, he is not to suffer any financial burden in view of the insurance of the vehicle and the direction by the Tribunal that the Insurance Company is also liable to pay the amount. The joint appeal at the instance of the owner and the Insurance Company would not be maintainable in view of the above judgment of the Supreme Court and after transposition of the Insurance Company, the appeal at the instance of the owner would not be maintainable.