:IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHI-IATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MA. No, Z%3 /2oo4. @ymm gwm : 1._,/Paras Ram Dhruv S/o Shri Baratu 1'" Dhmv aged about 29 years R/o — Village ~ Khaparadeeh Tah & Thana Bhatapara Village Dist. Raipur (C.G.) Vehicle Tractor Chechis engineNO. N.V. 04687 or Vehicle Traetor New No. CG. 04 D/- 2346 or Traolly Chechise No. A. E. 0266 Traolly No. ’ 0P. L. 6237 2/ Khulu Ram Devangan S/o Late Ram, ’ Gulam Dewangal aged about 67 years- , R./I Village Gandhi Mandir Bai Bhatapara Tah & Thana Bhatapara (City) Dist. Raipur (C.G.) Registered ' Owner of Vehicle Tractor Chechis x engine NO. NV. 04687 or Vehicle A Tractor New_>No.,C.G; 04 D/— 2346 or / Traolly Chechise No. A. E. 0266 Traolly No. C.P.’L. 6237' . g" PELLANTS VERSUS _1/' Smt. MantoraVBai , W/o. Late ~ Bhikliam Dhruv ageda bout 35 years /x2 Chandrashekhar S/o Late Bhikham Dhruv aged about 16 years x g1 Prakash Dhruv S/o Late — Bhikham Dhruv aged about 7 years \ 4f Suresh Kumar Dhruv S/o Bhikham ‘ Dhruv aged abour 5 years ‘ 5. Ku. Chandraka Bai Dhruv S/o Ni 'Bhikhamj aged about 1 years i N respondent no. 2to 5(legal galardlan ) mother;l\4antora Bai W/o Ehik’hm r w DhruV " s All R/o Village Buchipar Tah & Thana Bhatapara (Village) Dist. Raipur (C.G.) ‘ V . @@ . The New India Insurance ¥ Company Ltd. LBranch N0. ~ 2 ode 45030 RAO V9 Vehicle Chechis engine no. N.V. 04687 or Tracor New No. C.G. 04/D— 2346 7. Divisional Manager , The Oriental V Insurance Company Ltd. Kachahri Chauk Madeena Manjil Jail Road Raipur C.G. Registered Beemakarta ’ of Owner Tractor Trolly Chechise No. E. 0266 or Vehicle Trolly No. C.P.L. 06237 . APPEAL UNDER SECTION 73 OF TI-E MOTOR VEHICLES ACT — 198$. ’ ,._ £"’. ?If] “A v HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR ’ DB: HON’BLE LM. QUDDUSI & HON’BLE N.K. AGARWAL, JJ M. A. No. 1383 of 2004 f ARPELLANTS I I Paras Ram Dhruv and others Vs. RESPONDENTS Smt. Mantora Bai and others APPEARANCE: Mm. Renu Kochar, counsel for the appellants. M‘é ‘Samena Khan, counsel for respondents l té 5 Mr Neera] Pradhan counsel for respondent no 6 Mr Vmay Hal-1t Sr Advocated w1th S K Mishla counsel for mspondent l no 7 i 1 Per LM. oUDDuSI, J, t 01. This appeal has been hled against the impugned award dated 19.11.2004 passed by the ll Motor Accident Claims Tnbunal Baloda Bazar Dlstnct Ralpur (C G) 1n Cla1m Case No 11/2003 whereby The Tnbunal has lmposed the hab1l1ty of payment of compensahon on the appellants Whereas the ease of the applicants before the Tribunal was that non- applicant no.2 i.e., Khulu Ram Dewangan was the owner of the vehicle which was involved in the accident. l t r 02. The brief facts of the case as per the vers10n of the claimants are I that on O7 01 2003 at about 9 30 a m Janakmm Dhruv - and deceased Bh1kham were gomg by their cycles from the i house of Sukhram Nnmalkar for purchasmg the Gutka. A-t that time Tractor old No.4687, new no.C.G._O4-D/2346 and Trolly Chassis No.A.E.O266 Trolly No.C.P.L. 6237 which was ORDER (ORAL) (08.11.2010) n negligently a was coming towards village Surkhi mm atapara ashed Bikh Dhruv in &ont f house of ureshi Yadav on Bhatapara—Mopk road s a result of Dd a a . U hh Bhjkh Dhruv sustained seriou injuries and he e n the spot. 'The claimants made t the tune of 30 lahs oxx diEeIent heads. The Claims Tribunal after e t counsel for the parties and having considered h material on record awarde the total compensation of ,39,564/— whic the clnts are entitled to receive nom respoent no.2. 1 n‘ a z W have hear _ learned counsel for the parties and have also l’e d or ribunal perused the recds of the T In par of the pen, as ben menioned that he Tractor Ene Chass ld N 468 New no C.G.O4/ D‘—2346 and rolly has N0..E.266 and Trolly No C.P,L.62 were under the ownership of on-applicant-no.2 ly hl R Deanga name Kuu am wn 04. 05. Before this Court alo the plea of the appellants is that at the tie whe'the accident took place, the vehicle was not registered the nae of the appe rather it was already reg'stered in the f non-applicant no.2 .e., Khullu R The docunt sh tht the registering authority .I‘.O., Raipur (C.G) has regstered the vehle in question i the name of Khulu Ram Dewangan on 08.01.2003 whereas the accident took place on 67:01.2003». xHowever, in our opinion, it is not necessary that the person should be a registered owner. Once the Tractor was purchased horn the dealer, it was‘ the duty of the purchas ad nd Bh d am o ' wic am s iiid o claim o R4 k haring he te d $3 h aima i nd a 2 claim tttto 1t h e t t gin s1 o o NV i 1 i i T Cs1 A ‘1 37 n l r l s : m n in m llant 1 name o i am. me ows a i R’ i ic n wl. registration of the same if the same is not reg'stered and the purchaser cannot escape mm his liability. The invoice dated 13.01.2003 shows that the Tractor was delivered on U 13.01.2003 by Arun Trade Combines, Raipur to Khulu Ram Dewangan, son of RamguJam Dewangam and purchaser Khulu Ram Dewangan has made his signature on the receipt which is as under: “Received the above goods viz, Tractor] Trailor/ Tyres 61, Tubes 85 Agricultural implements in brand new and good condition. u ‘ Took trial and I am entirely satisned with maten'al function and quality and hence request to make the payment of the bill hence my consent.” Sd/ - [Gnulnram Dewangan Sigiature of the customer 6. This document has been hled by the leamed counsel for i non— applicants 1 8r. 2 themselves, In vievv of the above, it is 1c1ear that the delivery of the Tractor in question was taken l 1by appellant Khulu Ram Dewangan on 13.01.2003. l gTherefore, it is matter of surprise as to how the Tractor was i ‘Iegistered prior to the taking over/delivery in the name of i iKhulu Ram 'Dewangan on 08.01.2003. Hence, the said dealer was a necessary party in the claim pet'tion and he Eshould have been impleaded as party/non-applicant by the i i‘Tribunal itself as in section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, it ihas been provided that on receipt of an application for icompensation made u/s 166, the Claims Tribunal shall, i after giving notice of the application to the insurer and after igiving the. parties (including thejinsurer) an opportunity of ibeing heard, hold an inquiry into the claim. Therefore, these i idocuments create doubt and necessary enquiry is liable to @ A { be conducted by the Tn'bunal concerned to ascertain the fact. 7. In View of the above, we allow this appeal in part, set ‘aside the impugned award and Iemit the matter back to the Tribunal concerned which shall restore the claim petih'on to its original number. The dealer Arun Trade Combines, Regd. Ofdce No;H.43, Mana Road, Devpuri, Raipurf (C.G) who was authorized to sell Mahindra 85 Mahjndra Tractors shall be I m'ipleaded as party/non—applicant. The parn'es shall be allowed to adduce the evidence, nle documents or verify the documents and amend pleadings etc., and the claim petition shall be decided afresh as expeditiously as possibly. The records of the Tribunal shall be sent back to the Tribunal concerned forthwith. l ‘ The amount which has been deposited Shall IIOt b6 auowe‘i ‘ f to be withdrawn and if the amount or portion of.it has not been disbursed so far, the same shall'not be disbursed till the disposal of the claim petition. The parties who are represented here may appear before the Tribunal on 22nd November, 2O 10. I l 5 t l \ 77; y“ e 1 r C.C. as per rules. Sd/— Sdl- 1 r ‘ ' ' N. K. I.M.Quddusi i Judge Agarwal Judge ’