KARNAIL SINGH Vs. SOM NATH AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE fastening of liability upon the Insurance Company for Rs. 6,000/ - awarded as compensation to the claimant Som Nath for the injuries sustained by him was the relief sought in appeal. The Appellant here being Karnail Singh, the driver and the owner of the tractor HYA 9649 said to be offending tractor in this case. The case of the claimant being that he was travelling on the Jagadhari Ambala Road on his cycle when the tractor HYA -9649, driven by Karnail Singh came from behind and bit into him. This happened on April 19, 1985. It was the finding of the Tribunal that the accident here had indeed been caused by the said tractor and was the result of it being driven rashly and negligently by the Appellant Karnail Singh. A reference to the material on record would show that it was denied by Karnail Singh that the tractor HYA -9649 had been involved in any such accident. The two witnesses who deposed to the accident were A W. 1 Som Nath claimant and A.W. 2 Sat Pal Neither of them mentioned the number of the offending tractor nor indeed did they come forth with any particulars thereof. All that was mentioned was that Karnail Singh struck the tractor into the cycle of the claimant Som Nath. This evidence could at best establish the fact that the driver of the offending tractor was Karnail Singh, but it cannot be taken to suffice to fasten liability upon the Insurance Company. The Insurance Company could have been held liable only if the evidence on record established that the accident had been caused by the tractor HYA -9649. In the absence of such evidence, the Insurance Company clearly cannot be called upon to indemnify Karnail Singh in respect of any liability falling upon him by virtue of his being the owner of the offending tractor. Karnail Singh would no doubt be liable but only in his capacity as driver of the tractor involved in the accident but not as owner of the tractor HYA - 9649 which, as has been mentioned earlier, has not been shown to have been involved in any accident.

(2.) NO occasion thus arises in this appeal for fastening any liability upon the Insurance Company