S.D.Anand, J. - (1.) The present F.A.O. is by the insurer calling into question the validity of the finding recorded by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kaithal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') under issue No. 2 to the effect that the liability of the appellant and also the driver and the registered owner of the vehicle to pay the amount of compensation would be joint and several, though the appellant insurer would be entitled to recover that amount from the insured. That finding stems from the view recorded by Claims Tribunal to the effect that the deceased was a gratuitous passenger in the offending vehicle by which he was travelling.
(2.) The respondent Nos. 1 to 5 (hereinafter referred to as 'claimants') applied for the award of compensation to the tune of Rs. 10,00,000 as legal representatives of deceased Nakli Singh alias Nakul Singh who died in the impugned motor vehicular accident on 11.3.1996. As per the finding recorded by the Tribunal, the impugned accident was caused by Hushan Singh, respondent No. 7, by driving the offending vehicle bearing registration No. HR 37- 3859 rashly and negligently on 11.3.1996. The deceased, along with some others, had boarded that Swaraj Mazda vehicle as gratuitous passenger. The vehicle was com mercial in character and was not meant for passenger traffic.
(3.) Insurer appellant denied the very involvement of the offending vehicle in the impugned accident. It was averred, in that context, that no F.I.R. had been registered against the vehicle. It was further averred that the respondent No. 7 was neither the driver of the offending vehicle nor was he holding any driving licence at the time of impugned accident and he also was not in the employment of the insured at the time of impugned accident.;