S.D.ANAND,J - (1.) THE claim for award of compensation, filed by respondents No. 1 to 7 (hereinafter referred to as "the claimants) was decreed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani (hereinafter referred to as "the MACT") vide award dated 2.1.1993. The compensation awarded was Rs. 1,02,400/-. It was ordered to be payable by respondent No. 2 - Vijay Bhadur, the registered owner of vehicle bearing registration No. DIL-5205 (hereinafter referred to as "DIL vehicle"). The claimants' allegation was that the impugned accident had been caused by respondent No. 10 by driving the DIL vehicle rashly and negligently on 11.8.1987. The deceased and few others were travelling by a Matador bearing registration No. HNH-4006 (hereinafter referred to as "HNH vehicle") which was proceeding from Kalanaur to Dadri. When the HNH vehicle had covered a distance of about four kilometers from Dadri, the DIL vehicle came from the opposite direction and hit the HNH vehicle.
(2.) THE petition was contested only by United India Insurance Company (respondent No. 9 before this Court). All other respondents were proceeded ex parte. The plea raised by the United India Insurance Company was that the DIL vehicle was not insured with it. The liability to pay the amount of compensation was, accordingly, denied. The plea raised, in the alternative, was that the driver of DIL vehicle, was not holding a valid driving licence and further that it was also not a registered vehicle. The Tribunal framed issues on point of accountability for the causing of accident, the compensation awardable and the liability therefor, the holding or otherwise of the driving licences by the drivers of DIL and HNH vehicles and also on point of limitation. It was held by the Tribunal that the impugned accident was caused by driver of DIL vehicle who drove it rashly and negligently. The claimants were held entitled to a compensation of Rs. 1,02,400/-. The award was passed only against registered owner Vijay Bhadur (appellant before this Court). The United India Insurance Company was exonerated on a finding that the offending DIL vehicle was not proved to have been insured with it. The controversy with regard to the driving licenses was disposed of as having become redundant in view of the fact that the offending vehicle had not been proved to have been insured. The controversy with regard to the limitation was also disposed of as redundant. Along with that finding, it was also held by the Tribunal that the petition is within time inasmuch as the impugned accident had taken place on 11.8.1987; while the petition was filed on 16.9.1987. While dealing with the issue pertaining to limitation, the Tribunal noticed a plea raised on behalf of Vijay Bhadur appellant (registered owner of the driving vehicle) to the effect that the vehicle was indeed under insurance cover vide Insurance Policy (Exhibit R2). It was argued on behalf of the United India Insurance Company that the Insurance Policy aforesaid is in the name of M/s M.G.F. (I) Ltd., New Delhi which appeared to have financed that vehicle. The plea raised, in the context, was that Vijay Bhadur appellant would be deemed to have become registered owner of the DIL vehicle only on clearance of the loan amount.
(3.) I have heard learned counsel for respondent No. 8 i.e. the New India Assurance Company Ltd. and have carefully gone through the records. None appeared on behalf of the appellant before this Court.;