IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL First Appeal From Order No. 103 of 2007 (Old No. 830/99) Bhoop Singh S/o Sri Poran Singh R/o Village Moudawa Khera, Tehsil Kashipur Police Station Jaspur District Udham Singh Nagar ... Appellant Vs 1. Rakesh Kumar S/o Sri Bhoop Singh R/o Village Moudawa Khera Tehsil Kashipur, Police Station Jaspur District Udham Singh Nagar 2. Vikram Singh S/o Sri Fag Singh R/o Village Bhagvant Pur Police Station Jaspur Tehsil Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar Swami Tractor No. UP04/4551 3. National Insurance Company Ltd. District Udham Singh Nagar Through Divisional Manager, Haldwani District Nainital 4. Bhoop Singh S/o Sri Poran Singh R/o Village Moudawa Khera Tehsil Kashipur, Police Station Jaspur District Udham Singh Nagar ... Respondents Sri Jitendra Chaudhary, learned counsel for the appellant Sri D.S. Patni, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the judgment and order dated 16.10.1999 passed by M.A.C.T./Additional District Judge, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar in M.A.C.T. No. 23 of 1999 whereby the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition of the claimant/appellant. 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 04.01.1999, at about 03:00 p.m., Sri Likha Singh @ Pappu son of the appellant driving the tractor No. UP04/4551 on Kashipur Main Road. Due to negligence on the part of the driver, Sri Lila Singh fell down from the tractor and died on the spot. At the time of the accident, he was aged about 22 years and used to earn Rs. 4,000/- by agricultural and as a milkman. Therefore, the claimant filed claim petition before the Tribunal concerned for Rs. 12,00,000/- as compensation. 3. The opposite parties contested the claim petition by filing their written statement before the Tribunal concerned. The Tribunal on the basis of the pleadings of the parties framed relevant issues, which were discussed in great detail. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire material available on record, dismissed the claim petition vide judgment and order dated 16.10.1999. 4. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order, the claimant/appellant preferred this appeal before this Court. 5. Heard Sri Sri Jitendra Chaudhary, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri D.S. Patni, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 and perused the record. 6. After having heard learned counsel for the appellant and perusing the entire material available on record, I do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned judgment and order passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has recorded the findings that the driver of the tractor was not holding the valid driving licence on the date of accident. It has further held that the co-owner of the tractor has not been made the party in the claim petition and the appellant himself is one of the owner of the tractor, therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay any compensation. I am in total agreement with the finding recorded by the Tribunal. The appeal lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. 7. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed in-limine. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) 19.03.2008 ASWAL