ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. DHARMO AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has arisen out of the award rendered on 04.10.2008, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fast Track Court, Chamba in MAC Petition No.35 of 2008/2007, whereby the learned Tribunal awarded compensation to the respondents/claimants in the sum of Rs.3,77,000/- along with interest @ 7 % per annum from the date of the filing of the petition till its realization. The burden of compensation, as determined in favour of the respondents/claimants, was laid upon the insurer of the offending vehicle, who is the appellant before this Court.

(2.) The appellant/insurer is aggrieved, by the learned Tribunal, having laid the burden of compensation on it. The learned counsel for the appellant has canvassed before this Court that the award of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is ingrained with an illegality inasmuch as the owner of the vehicle, who was enjoined to be impleaded as a party in the array of the respondents in the petition, as mandated by Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, inasmuch as the liability to defray the amount of compensation as assessed by the learned Tribunal was initially to be fastened upon him and thereafter the owner was to be indemnified by the insurer, consequently, omission on the part of the petitioner to array the owner of the offending vehicle as a respondent in the petition has defacilitated the aforesaid process and caused infraction of the mandate of Section 163- A of the Act. As a corollary, it is contended that the Award rendered against the appellant/insurer be set aside as nonest

(3.) Even, if there is a valid insurance qua the offending vehicle executed by the insurer/appellant, it acquired legal force only in the face of, also the owner of the vehicle being impleaded as a party in the array of respondents, in the instant petition instituted under Section 163-A of the Act, as on his being arrayed as a respndent the mandate enshrined in Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, provisions thereof are extracted hereinbelow, contemplating the arraying of the owner of the vehicle as a respondent for initially fastening the liability upon him as determined by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and then the owner being ordered to be indemnified by the insurer, would come to be complied.