(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. FIRST APPEAL NO. 962 OF 2005 Sambhaji s/o. Sadashiv Usnale, Age : 39 years, Occupation : Service & Business, .. Appellant R/o. Answarwada, (Original Taluka : Nilanga, respondent no.2) District : Latur. versus 1. Urmilabai w/o. Balaji Waghmare, Age : 32 years, Occupation : Household & Labour. 2. Shriram s/o. Balaji Waghmare, Age : 4 years, Occupation : Nil, U/G. of applicant no.1 present Respondent No.2 i.e. natural mother. 3. Dadarao s/o. Bhimrao Waghmare, Age : 53 years, Occupation : Labour. 4. Sou. Magabai w/o. Dadarao Waghmare, Age : 48 years, Occupation : Household & Labour. Respondent Nos.1 to 4 All R/o. Ansarwada, Taluka : Nilanga, District : Latur. (2) 5. Maruti s/o. Ramrao Itkar, .. Appeal already Age : 30 years, dismissed as against Occupation : Driver, respondent no.5. R/o. Answarwada, Taluka : Nilanga, District : Latur. 6. The New India Insurance Company Ltd., .. Respondents Through its Branch Manager, (Nos.1 to 4 - Original Branch at Chandra Nagar, Latur. claimants & Nos.5 and 6 - Original appellant nos.1 and 3 ) ....................... Mr. S.S. Manale, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. B.N. Patil, Advocate, for respondent nos.1 to 4. Appeal dismissed as against respondent no.5 vide Court's order dated 15-4-2009. Mr. U.S. Kulkarni, Advocate, holding for Mr. S.L. Kulkarni, Advocate, for respondent no.6. ........................ CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 1ST APRIL 2010 COURT'S ORDER : 1. Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties, (3) extensively. 2. The award of the learned Ad hoc Additional District Judge and Ex officio Member of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nilanga, dated 30th April 2005, is questioned by the appellant (original respondent no.2) whereby the liability of Rs. 1,16,000/- is fixed by the learned Member. 3. Twofold submissions were advanced by Mr. Manale, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant, (A) there was an insurance and the liability of original respondent no.3, the New India Insurance Company Ltd., should have been upheld, and (B) there was transfer of the ownership for which affidavit of the subsequent purchaser i.e. Maroti Bhagwanrao Manjule, being produced in this court, as well, before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, it will have impact on the matter. 4. In the affidavit of Maroti Bhagwanrao Manjule, he did state that he had purchased the tractor and trolley from the present appellant, 5 - 6 months prior to the accident. He had obtained signatures on tractor's transfer form, however, could not effect the necessary transfer for want of funds. He confirmed that he was owner and possessor of the tractor and there was no liability of appellant, Sambhaji, to meet the claim. These aspects, as stated by the original appellant, Maruti, may (4) be correct. However, the legal frame under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and specifically Section 157 thereof cannot be obliterated. The transaction of said Maruti with the appellant Sambhaji, being betrayal to the above referred Act, will not have its adverse impact on the directions issued by the learned Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The travel was in breach of terms of insurance policy, user was also not permitted. Consequently, I do not see any irregularity or perversity in the order of the learned Judge in fixing the liability and exonerating the Insurance Company. 5. In the result, the First Appeal is dismissed. No costs. ( K.U. CHANDIWAL ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/fa962