MEHRUN Vs. SAMIN AKHTAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel of the parties.

(2.) The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that respondent No. 1 who was owner of the vehicle which was involved in the accident, died long ago. Appellant submitted an application on 19.3.2004 and sought deletion of the name of the owner of the vehicle, respondent No. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in view of section 110-B of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1939'), the appeals shall not abate and will not have any effect on its maintainability even when the legal representatives of the owner of the vehicle have not been impleaded as party in the appeal and the appeal will survive after deletion of the name of the owner of the vehicle from the array of the parties because section 110-B of the Act of 1939 provides that the Tribunal may award amount which shall be paid by the said three all or by any of them as the case may be.

(3.) Learned counsel for appellant relied upon the judgment of this court delivered in the case of Nainu Ram v. Bhagwan Singh, 1988 Company Cases (Vol. 63) 818, wherein single Bench of this court, after considering section 110-B of the Act of 1939, as amended by the Act of 1969, observed that even if the driver died during the pendency of the claim petition and his legal representatives have not been brought on record, the claim petition will not fail on that ground in view of the specific provision in section 110-B of the Act of 1939. It was observed that it embodies the principle of liability on joint tortfeasors.