PARVEZ AHMAD Vs. JUGAL KISHORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four appeals are being disposed of together by this common judgment.

(2.) On 3rd April 1995 when the case came up for consideration Shri D. S. Thakur Advocate had appeared on behalf of respondent No. 3, National Insurance Company. He was directed to obtain instructions from the Insurance Co. in all the four cases. On 18 April 1995, however, when the case came up for hearing, Mr. Thakur informed the court that he had contacted his client, but they conveyed to him that some other counsel had been engaged. No other counsel however, appeared on behalf of the Insurance Company.

(3.) The appeals are directed against judgments dated 26-10-91 in all the four cases delivered by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajouri whereby the respondent National Insurance Company has been totally absolved of its liability to pay the compensation amount and respondent Jugal Kishore has been held liable and responsible to pay the entire compensation amount in favour of the claimants. The appellants contention is that the Tribunal erred in law in determining and fixing the responsibility to pay compensation qua respondent Jugal Kishore and that the finding of the Tribunal that the vehicle's ownership vested in this respondent was erroneous and incorrect. It was also contended by the appellants that since respondent Satish Kumar Handa continued to be the owner of the vehicle as on the date of the accident, he was liable to pay the award and in turn the insurer of the vehicle was liable to indemnify him for any such payment.