IN THE HIGH COURT OF JURISDICTION OF CHHATTISGAR AT BILASPUR .CG?- M.A. N0. ^n^ /2006 ^- MEMO FO APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT 1988. APPELLANT:- NON-APPLICANT No 2 ^€ ^&^ ^c^ <?^..--"" ^t^ RESPONDENTS No 1:- 1. Respnodent no. 2 ^Arul Kuinar Keshanyani, S/o -Shankar Lal Kesharwani, Aged -41 years, R/o - AnU Agency Near Bharatiya Jivan Buna Nigam Road, Magarpara, Bilaspur, District - BUaspur (C.G.). VERSUS Ku. Satyawati Kashayap, D/o - Geeta Ram Kashayap, Aged about 17 Years. Minor Through Father - Geeta Rara Kashayap, aged about 38 years, son of Lalita Prasad R/0 ViUage Sarvan Devari Police Station Ratanpur Tah & Distt - BOaspur (C.G.) DiUip Kuinar Kashayap, S/o Shri Ram Narayan @ Jagru Kashyap, Aged about - 36 years. R/0 Vmage Karaihapara, Ratanpur Tah & Distt - Bil^spur (C.G.) Amount claimed Rs. - 25,50,700/- Amount awarded Rs. - 25000/- (As interim ) ^' <v^ _ ..--•''-"'"^ 'iQ^" XI-HC-78 an^T^rfN^ gWSlTc^TsbHI* s-af-^M\v\ss, •a'^ww, [»ifii<-i^< {V\. f\. Ct) ^ ^l- (^ *TT'RCII ShHIW ^TT 200 ^ h 3TT^T ((?TER' (yi(^ci^ST) STBRRH{?(T3n^r ^rafepfrr WRit'ffWt KfwOT ^arf^iTsn^r 1 ^/1 1 /^f^Hi^ ^. &f fu.VW Sh"i Hemgnt Supta, coun^e! for the oppellant. Henrd .0.1 I-.A. No. 34119/2006 for taking documents on record. A'lowed; Hecrd on admission. This AAisc. Appec! is d|rected against the order dcsted 26.6.2006 passea by the First Additiona! .Motoi" Accident Clsims Tribunai, Biiaspur . whereby ^n cmount of compensation of fts.?5,000/- was directed to be [said by the cype!lant under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, Sfr, princip!e of no fauit liabHity, Sriefiy.statedthe undis^uted facts ars thct the apps'lont herein is ths aufhorized deais!'! of Sonaiika Znter'nctiona! Trcctor at Bilaspur. On 6.11.2005, a So|iaiika IntesrnQtionai Tractor vciued liued at Rs. 70.000/- was deiivered IPrascd Sharinc for dsn'-onstr'ation at fts. 3.58.735/- cnd Trol'ey vol by •1-he cDoeliant to ane Jssdish purpose ofter' rscsivino cn cmou.)it of Ss-35,000/-. It so happened TnoT whiie we TracTor rroiiey ifiW^ i'^ r"{ scs^'^riv ^^ .T^f"^1<h P^'rts3^^ 'V^-S Si'! l^ii-^ 3 t^:k^ V IJ i *.;,'^(^.i^i iSi i i' a-U^SU^ Shcwma ond was beins driven b|/ his drwer Diiip Kumor' Kashyap, near Ratdnpur on 9.11.2005, it c^ashed against Sctyawati Kcshyop. It is also not in dispul^ thot neither ths tractor troHey was insured on the dote of accidentjnor was it reglstered in the name of Jagd'sh Proscd Sharma on tHe"! fated d'm. It is uiso not jn. XI-HC-78 .:i-B*-<<itiiciif, ®Tf|yii<s,RiMwy /^, A- • CO. S'2-'L *<1*IWI ShHKft ^200^ 3T1^7r q?W (yf(^qi^<T) 3n^TqiTR-1 aw a'n^''snw STcn'WHfN'sn^i ~ 5 - that dispute thot remcining consij: date of acc>deRt. The cicimant pleaded Parap'egia (Trqumatic) on th^ that 90% disability wos ccusetl Petition ' C.T. No. 161/200E Section 140 of the Motor Vehl Learned First ,4dditi< iitepur' "ecordsd the findiji^ Troiisy wa§ in 'custody of orta deiTionstroti.on, purpose on h 35,000/- had , 'been poid' by| QOosilant herein. It also recol the cer-ificat®Qiyen by thel wo,s caused to Ku. Sotyawati Klssi Shrl HeriCnt Supta le^ assaiied the imDugned orde IT or ccins fteiiance 'MO.S ptoced on Ssnja^ »;f. !.. J. »M<ilci4)-<>iiiiiTffte^<Ri«i< ^sri^pTsn^T teration was due ond unpaio on the she sustained grievous injury i.e. bock. The Medicai Board certified to Ku. Satyawat' KashvaD. ^In Claim or cQwpenso.tion an opp'ication under ictes Act. 1988 was fiied. Motor Accident Cicims Tribuncl \IQ that on 9.11.2005, the Tractor Jaodish Prasad Sharma on'y for> is conse.nt and o?i!y a sum of Rs. him to the cuthorized decier i.e. hded the f'nding that o" the basis of Alsedical Soard permanent discbjiit;/ yap. eAmed counsel for the ooDeiiont hos on -'r'.e grounc' that deliysry of isideration are sufficient to fasten j.iability on the purchaser on t^e principie of no fauit liobiiity under Section 140 of.the Mo+or' VeHii accident. the vehicle was not icles Act even fhouoh on *hs dote of ^egistered in the na.me of purchcser. Sffsfffs Thefsijr K?. Sultan Ahmad rf |*'he"e!n it wcs held thct ooyment of XI-HC-78 swi •^wwi, s^wre, fi<-ii'tfgi: f^.-t\- Cc) -^i. z- *n*<wi sh*<ic»'> W[ 200 ^ •sn^rwfiFrw gqr gn^»rshtiith ;fL K-y' ^ ^' 3(1^1 4sl* ('i?iIs8"<.eT) CTdTWdf^TaTt^I' - •? consEderotion acco.mpdn'ed bv] vehicie compietes the tr'onsact of the Durchaser under Section Hdvino heard the ieorne +i<i[ci''fl-f fli>iciTfftecA<Ri*<i< ^gri^T-sn^r deliver'y of possession of moter on of'snle and constitutes iiabiiity 140 of the Motor Vehicies Act. d counsel and afte" perusing the 1 cited bv the iearned counsei for iered opirtlon thatthis AAisc. Appecl is Tiot disDLited thot on the documents cs a'so the case'iaul the oppellant, I am of'the consi<| deserves to be dismi.ssisd in Si'^ine. The case taw cited does not come to the aid of the appelian^cnd is cieariy distinguishabia as jots of accident, oniy a sum of rne enTi"e remain'ng cons'aeraTion Rs.35,000/- had been paid/and wciS due-. Thus. transaction of s4.Ie was not comDiete on the date of accident since enti?^ remaininfc consideratior. was due. Under Sectlon 140 of the Motor V^hides Act, the liabiiity to pcy compensation in respect of dny an cccident therefope; sqiiar'ely owner and authoxizecf decier of question on thedote ofdcciderit^ Ih view of the aboye, t^ mento.nd is dismissed atthe stat M.(C).P. N&, 1320/20Q6, lermanent disnbiSitv' orisinci out of 'ests on the appeiiant who was the F the SoncEika Trastar Troilev in is Misc. .AQDeai is ?e 6f odmission. Ifo" stay of inte-im id of cny •d aiso stands disposed of. C.C. os oe" "ujes. Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge