C.R.No.2018 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 17.7.2009 C.R.No.2018 of 2009 Ashutosh Batra ...Petitioner Versus Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panipat & Ors. ...Respondents C.R.No.2019 of 2009 Ashutosh Batra ...Petitioner Versus Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panipat & Ors. ...Respondents C.R.No.2020 of 2009 Ashutosh Batra ...Petitioner Versus Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panipat & Ors. ...Respondents C.R.No.2021 of 2009 Ashutosh Batra ...Petitioner Versus Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panipat & Ors. ...Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: Mr. Tribhuvan Dahiya, Advocate, for the petitioner in all the petitions. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) This order shall dispose of C.R.Nos.2018 of 2009, 2019 of 2009, 2020 of 2009 and 2021 of 2009. However, for facility of reference, the facts are taken from C.R.No.2018 of 2009. Challenge in the revision petition is to the order passed by the C.R.No.2018 of 2009 2 learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal on 14.3.2009, whereby the application filed by the petitioner for impleading M/s Aalianz Automobiles, Kamal cinema Building, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi, as the additional respondent being purchaser of the vehicle from the petitioner herein, was declined. Learned trial Court has declined such application for the reasons that the registered owner of the vehicle is the petitioner and not the purchaser and that it is well-settled that the Tribunal can award compensation only against registered owner. Learned counsel for the appellant relies upon National Insurance C. Ltd. Vs. Deepa Devi and others (2008-1) 149 PLR 780 (S.C.) and M/s Godavari Finance Co. Vs. Degala Satyanarayanamma and others (2008-3) PLR 257 to contend that the finding that the Tribunal can award compensation against registered owner is not legal and factual incorrect. It is also contended that the transfer of motor vehicle is governed by the provisions of Sales of Goods Act, 1930 and on proof of transfer of vehicle in terms of Section 19 of the Act, the compensation can be awarded against the transferee other than registered owner. In view of the said fact, the reasoning given by the trial Court is not sustainable. Consequently, the present petitions are allowed. The order passed by the Tribunal dated 14.3.2009 is set aside and M/s Aalianz Automobiles,is ordered to be impleaded as additional respondent before the Tribunal. Civil Revisions stand disposed of accordingly. 17.7.2009 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE