KASHI NATH PODDAR Vs. ARCHANA SAHAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard counsel for the parties.

(2.) This miscellaneous appeal is directed against the judgment dated 17.6.1987, passed by the 2nd Additional District Judge-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dhanbad, in Title (Compensation) Suit No. 69 of 1984, by which the learned Tribunal has directed for payment of compensation to the claimant to the tune of Rs. 2,88,000, out of which Rs. 1,50,000 was payable by the insurance company (respondent No. 2) and the rest by the owner of the vehicle, i.e., the appellant.

(3.) Mr. Kameshwar Prasad, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of appellant, mainly contended that the appellant, who is the owner of the vehicle in question, is not liable to pay compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, because the vehicle in question was insured by the insurance company (respondent No. 2) and it was a comprehensive insurance and, therefore, the insurance company was covering the entire risk and as such the insurance company was to indemnify the insured. Learned counsel also submitted that the learned Tribunal even in absence of the appellant or his driver, who was driving the vehicle in question at the relevant time, could not have passed the impugned judgment against them directing them to pay compensation to the claimant.