OMKAR PUROHIT Vs. ROHIT KUMAR TRIPATHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.S.Bahadur, learned counsel for the Appellant and Mr.N.B.Das, learned counsel for Respondent No.2-Insurer as well as Ms.P.Sinha on behalf of Mr.L.N.Patel, learned counsel for the owner-Respondent No.1.

(2.) The claimant has filed the present appeal against the judgment dtd. 30/11/2007 passed by the learned 2nd Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Northern Division, Sambalpur in Misc.(A) Case No.289 of 2000(s). The grievance of the claimant-Appellant is that the learned Tribunal though has directed for payment of compensation to the tune of Rs.1,43,284.00 but has exonerated the insurer from indemnifying the compensation amount on behalf of the owner.

(3.) It is submitted that the learned Tribunal on an erroneous approach has exonerated the insurer from its liability on the ground that the owner, namely, Rohit Kumar Tripathy was not the registered insured in respect of the vehicle in the policy.