AMRIT GRANITE INDUSTRIES Vs. ARVIND SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance against the order dated 9.12.99 of the learned single Judge, whereby he dismissed the writ petition of the appellant company.

(2.) The short facts are these: Amrit Granite Industries (appellant) owned a motor cycle bearing the registration No. RJ 10-M-1755. There was an accident with this motor cycle and one Arvind Sharma sustained injuries. He filed a claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur, against Amrit Granite Industries (appellant) and Sarafat Ali. An application under section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, was moved which was allowed by the Tribunal. It was directed that the amount shall be paid by Amrit Granite Industries as it was the registered owner of the vehicle at the time of the accident. This interim award was challenged by appellant by filing a writ petition which was dismissed by the learned single Judge as stated above.

(3.) Mr. Simlot, learned counsel for the appellant, contended that the award could not be passed against the appellant as it is only the registered owner of the vehicle, whereas Sarafat Ali is its ostensible owner. Relying on the two judgments of Kerala High Court, Swaminathan v. Jayalakshmi Amma, 1988 ACJ 261 (Kerala) and Said Mohammed v. Rema, 1996 ACJ 477 (Kerala), Mr. Simlot contended that the interim award passed against the appellant is not sustainable in law.