GOPAL LAL GUPTA,J. - (1.) THESE two appeals arise out of award passed by the learned Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bikaner on 26.7.1989 in Claim Case No. 23 of 1986.
(2.) THE owner and the driver have challenged the award by filing Appeal No. 275 of 1989 pleading that the accident had occurred because of rash and negligent driving of jeep No. RJS 6395 and, the claim should have been decreed against the owner, driver and the insurer of that vehicle. The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. by filing Appeal No. 261 of 1989 has challenged this part of the direction in the award that it may recover the sum of Rs. 15,000/ - and interest paid under Section 92 -A of the Motor Vehicles Act by filing separate suit. The claimants case was that Vijay Kumar, aged 20, was travelling in jeep RJS 774 driven by Mahi Ram on Bikaner -Nokha road and that this jeep collided with jeep RJS 6395 which was coming from opposite direction and driven by Shyam Sunder. The claimants case was that Vijay Kumar suffered fatal injuries and died after 2 days. Rs. 5,02,080/ - were claimed as compensation. In the reply, Mahi Ram denied that he was driving the jeep. The case set up by Guman Giri, owner, was that he had already sold the jeep on 10.12.1985, i.e., before the accident to one Bhagwana Ram. The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. admitted that the jeep was insured with them, but it denied the liability on the grounds that jeep had already been sold by the insured and that insured used the jeep as taxi; whereas it was registered as a private vehicle. The driver and owner of the jeep RJS 6395 did not file return. The Tribunal framed 4 issues. The claimants examined 5 witnesses and in rebuttal Guman Giri and Bhagwana Ram gave their statements. One Deepa Ram, an employee of Registration Department was also examined. The learned Tribunal after hearing the parties held that the accident had taken place because of rash and negligent driving of jeep No. RJS 774 by Mahi Ram and Guman Giri was owner of that jeep and, therefore, they were liable to pay compensation. A sum of Rs. 39,000/ - was awarded as compensation. The claim was dismissed against the insurance company on the ground that there was. breach of terms of policy by the insured.
(3.) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.;