'^ IN THE^IGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASKIR (CG1 Misc. Appeal No. ^-^2—Of200^ SINGLE BENCH APPELLANTS 1. Tejram @ Teja @ Ashok Tandon S/o -/ Chheduram,aged 26 Years , resident of Puraina , Thana Dabhara District Janjgir Champa, at present residing at Chhote Khaira, P.S. Sarangarh District Raigarh (CG). 2. Harbansh Kuraar S/o Shiv Prasad , aged 33 / Years , resident of Chhote Khaira , P.S. Sarangarh, District Raigarh (CG). ^ VERSUS RESPONDENTS: "1. Panch Ram S/o Shobha'Ram , aged about CLAIMANTS f \w^ ^l ^/ ^ / >i/y" /yW /<y^ ^' 58 years. 2. Shyam Bai W/o Panch Rara, aged 45 years. 3. Minor Johit Kumar S/o Panch Rain, aged 16 vears . All resident ofChandai , P.S. Sarangarh District Raigarh (CG). At present resident of Mohatara, Post Manpasar, P.S. Sarsiwa ,Tahsil Bilaigarh District Raipur (CG). (CLAIMANTS) .<?• < ^'^ <:•• ^s.^-f<-' & ^ JUip New Tnidia-AssaFaHee-eompany-fchmted; ^l^-ob ^BEaBch-Q£Bce^aigarh_(CG). (^^Uyj; NON-APPLICANT N0.3 ) ''»L'&-'&—0^ t. ^^> A Vfc-3 MEMORANDUM OF MISC APPEAL XJNDER SECTIQN 173 QF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT i" 6^<i...J \/rtiAuj>- £To.s-3-g r XI-HC-22 sn^iqn R'li'* ^i^i aiiit^lfTO '^ -s'^.'^ipncR, 's^ms; fawi'y.y w. W1CTI »l11<») 311^1 ^itWHita 13.04.2006 <=l)rat<t^1 141^<lf'^ fsl<) <(^1^1< ^; siPaT sn^r Shri UR Koshley, coipnsel for the appellants. None for responden|'s. Heard on admission.1 Janakram met wittf a motor accident, sustained ihjuries and succumbed to the injures. Appellont No.l driving the vehicle belonging to appellarit t^p. 2 caussd; the accident. Respondents/ claimants fiied c!aim peti^ion in the cdpacit/ of legal representatiyes of the dsceased ond also filed an application under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicle Act (henceforth "The Act") for interim award. Learned Tribunai after due con^deration of pleadings and documerits on record, allowed the opp Learned counsel forf of incident, the offendin^ took place on 21.02.2004 ,| on the owner of the veHi owner of a vehicle does non-registration of a vehij 140 of the Motor Vehicle ication dnd gronted Rs.50,000/- towards the appellonts contended that on the date vehicle wgs unre9istered. The registration therefore, the liability cannot be fastened licle. The contention has no force because ^iot escape from his liability on account of :le which does not affect his title* Section Act envisages that if any person as a result representat|yes are entitled to recover [Tfi^ ^Fo^ XI-HC-22 T ^ -3^ ^(l.siM'q, ^WIis, 'facil'My 311^1 ^iT (<;-ii<* anjsi a)^ ^i^i k X. •^, padifia A).^. ijiW-if SCTKtJ 311^!(1 ^•WIWHftg interim award from th'e ovulier of the yehicle and in case the vehicle is IRule 227 of the Motor Vehicle Ruies, 1994 feward can also be fastened dn insurer. by the appellants that at the time of accident, the vehicle- wa^ not owned by appelldnt No.2. When necessary documentsas re^uined under Rule 227 of the Motor Vehicle insured in accordance with liabilit/ to pay the interim It is not di; Rules 1994 were with the! The grant of interinj appear to be unauthorise^ and insurer, jn accordance and 227 of the AAotor Vehi appellants is dismissed. 4if'4i<rt4t°1 'tiTR^f ^T 'fe^ <P*)^s< i;3lPOT 311^1 Tribunal, it.was for the Tpibunal to pass interim award and it app^ars that thfe Tribunal qccordingly did it. Appellants during the argui^ent did not raise any other question. award in favour of the ciaimants does not or illegal. However, the Tribunal shouid bear in m'md that the liab|lity to pay interim awoird !ies on the owner M>ith Section 140 of the AAotor Vehicle Act fcleRules 1994. With the aforesai<| observations, the cxppea! filed by the Sdi- V.K.Shrivastava Judge ^