GOBIND RAM Vs. UMED SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - Petition filed by Umed singh, respondent, under section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the grant of compensation of Rs. 75,000 on account of injuries received by him in a road accident, was partly accepted and he was granted the compensation of Rs. 16,000 along with costs and interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum, to be paid by Kewal Singh, respondent No. 2 and Gobind Ram, appellant, who were driver and owner of the offending vehicle, jointly and severally. Aggrieved by the same the owner of the offending vehicle has filed the present appeal.

(2.) THE only controversy in the present case is as to who has to pay the amount of compensation. Whether it was to be paid by the owner and driver of the offending vehicle or by the insurance company with which the vehicle in question was insured?

(3.) THE offending truck bearing registration No. RJK 7006 was owned by one mohinder Singh. It stood insured with the respondent insurance company for third party risks with effect from 8. 8. 1985 upto 7. 8. 1986. The accident in question took place on 11. 1. 1986, which was admittedly within the currency of the insurance policy. However, it was the case of the appellant that he had purchased the offending truck from Mohinder Singh. However, he did not apply for transfer of the insurance certificate in his name. After relying on the judgments in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. E. K. Muhammed, 1985 ACJ 109 (Kerala) and Precto Pipe Co. v. National insurance Co. Ltd. , 1984 ACJ 218 (Pandh), learned Tribunal held that insurance company was not at all liable to pay anything by way of compensation to the claimant. Only the driver and the owner, namely, kewal Singh and Gobind Ram were held liable for the same.