KHANDU Vs. LAXMINARAYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal Under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short "the Act"), shall also govern the disposal of Misc. Appeal No. 175/79 Vitthal v. Laxminarayan and Ors. and Misc. Appeal No. 176/79 Deceased Shiva and Legal Representatives Gopabai v. Laxminarayan and Ors.

(2.) SHORT facts for disposal of these appeals are as under:

(3.) THE learned Tribunal framed the issues. No issue was framed about the acting of the driver beyond the authority and the scope of the employment and giving of the lift unauthorisedly without the consent of the owner. No issue was also framed to the effect that master/owner is not vicariously liable. The evidence was recorded in claim case No. 47/77 Khandu v. Laxman four witnesses were examined on behalf of the claimants, i.e. Gopabai (PW 1), Khandu (PW 2), Vitthal (PW 3) all claimants, and Loten an eye-witness. In rebuttal no witness was examined by any of the parties, even, the driver and owner did not examine themselves. Insurance Company produced the policy of the Insurance which was admitted by the parties.