Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Avtar Singh Chhabra vs Arun Lal And Ors on 12 November, 2020
Author: Sandeep Mehta
Bench: Sandeep Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2865/2017
Avtar Singh Chhabra S/o. Sh. Kartar Singh, By Caste- Sikh, R/o.
H.no.3, Devharsh Banglow, Behind Lemdi Hotel Meethakhali,
Ahmedabad, Registered Owner GJ24-U2516
----Appellant
Versus
1. Arun Lal S/o Late Babu Lal
2. Jyoti Kumari D/o Late Babu Lal
3. Bharat Kumar S/o Late Babu Lal,
4. Chandrawati D/o Late Babu Lal, By Caste Harijan And R/o
Vill. Delwada Kojara, Teh. Pindwada, Sirohi.
5. Abhay Singh Deora S/o Naga Singh, R/o Vill. Jitpura, Teh.
Bhinmal, Jalore. Driver-Now-Dead.
6. The Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd. Through Divisional Manager,
Chandel Building, Mandia Raod, Pali. Insurer.
7. Smt. Panku Devi W/o Ramesh Kumar, By Caste Mali, R/o
Vill. Achalgarh Mount Abu, Teh. Abu Road, Sirohi.
Purchaser Owner.
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2863/2017
Avtar Singh Chhabra S/o. Sh. Kartar Singh, By Caste- Sikh, R/o.
H.no.3, Devharsh Banglow, Behind Lemdi Hotel Meethakhali,
Ahmedabad, Registered Owner GJ24-U2516
----Appellant
Versus
1. Bharat Kumar S/o Late Babu Lal Harijan, R/o Vill.
Delwada Kojara, Teh. Pindwara, Sirohi.
2. Abhay Singh Deora S/o Naga Singh, R/o Vill. Jitpura, Teh.
Bhinmal, Jalore. Driver-Now-Dead.
3. The Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd. Through Divisional Manager,
Chandel Building, Mandia Raod, Pali. Insurer.
4. Smt. Panku Devi W/o Ramesh Kumar, By Caste Mali, R/o
Vill. Achalgarh Mount Abu, Teh. Abu Road, Sirohi.
Purchaser Owner.
(Downloaded on 12/11/2020 at 09:20:59 PM)
(2 of 9) [CMA-2865/2017]
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2864/2017
Avtar Singh Chhabra S/o. Sh. Kartar Singh, By Caste- Sikh, R/o.
H.no.3, Devharsh Banglow, Behind Lemdi Hotel Meethakhali,
Ahmedabad, Registered Owner Gj24-U2516
----Appellant
Versus
1. Arun Lal S/o Late Babu Lal
2. Jyoti Kumari D/o Late Babu Lal
3. Bharat Kumar S/o Late Babu Lal,
4. Chandrawati D/o Late Babu Lal, By Caste Harijan And R/o
Vill. Delwada Kojara, Teh. Pindwada, Sirohi.
5. Abhay Singh Deora S/o Naga Singh, R/o Vill. Jitpura, Teh.
Bhinmal, Jalore. Driver-Now-Dead.
6. The Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd. Through Divisional Manager,
Chandel Building, Mandia Raod, Pali. Insurer.
7. Smt. Panku Devi V/o Ramesh Kumar, By Caste Mali, R/o
Vill. Achalgarh Mount Abu, Teh. Abu Road, Sirohi.
Purchaser Owner.
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 901/2018
Panku Devi W/o Shri Ramesh Kumar, By Caste - Mali, Resident
Of Achalgarh, Mt. Abu, Tehsil - Abu Road, District Sirohi.
Rajasthan. - Subsequent Purchaser Truck No. Gj24-U-2516
----Appellant
Versus
1. Arun Lal S/o Babulal,
2. Jyoti Kumari D/o Babulal,
3. Bharat Kumar S/o Babulal,
4. Chandravati D/o Babulal, All By Caste - Harijan, Resident
Of Delwara Kojra, Tehsil - Pindwara, District Sirohi
Rajasthan.
5. Abhay Singh Deora S/o Naga Singh, By Caste - Rajput,
Resident Of Jeetpura, Bhinmal, District Jalore. - Driver
Truck No. Gj24-U-2516
6. Avtar Singh Chawda S/o Kartar Singh, Resident Of House
No. 3, Dev Harsh Bnaglow, Behind Lemdi, Hotel,
(Downloaded on 12/11/2020 at 09:20:59 PM)
(3 of 9) [CMA-2865/2017]
Meethakhali, Ahmedabad, Gujrat. - Owner Truck No.
Gj24-U-2516
7. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Through Its
Divisional Manager, In Front Of Lic, Chandel Building,
Mandia Road, District - Pali Rajasthan. - Insurer Truck No.
Gj24-U-2516
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 902/2018
Panku Devi W/o Shri Ramesh Kumar, By Caste - Mali, Resident
Of Achalgarh, Mt. Abu, Tehsil - Abu Road, District Sirohi.
Rajasthan. Subsequent Purchaser Truck No. Gj24-U-2516
----Appellant
Versus
1. Arun Lal S/o Babulal,
2. Jyoti Kumari D/o Babulal,
3. Bharat Kumar S/o Babulal,
4. Chandravati D/o Babulal, All By Caste - Harijan, Resident
Of Delwara Kojra, Tehsil - Pindwara, District - Sirohi
Rajasthan.
5. Abhay Singh Deora S/o Naga Singh, By Caste - Rajput,
Resident Of Jeetpura, Bhinmal, District Jalore. - Driver
Truck No. Gj24-U-2516
6. Avtar Singh Chawda S/o Kartar Singh, Resident Of House
No. 3, Dev Harsh Bnaglow, Behind Lemdi, Hotel,
Meethakhali, Ahmedabad, Gujrat. - Owner Truck No.
Gj24-U-2516
7. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Through Its
Divisional Manager, In Front Of Lic, Chandel Building,
Mandia Road, District - Pali Rajasthan. - Insurer Truck No.
Gj24-U-2516
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 903/2018
Panku Devi W/o Shri Ramesh Kumar, By Caste - Mali, Resident
Of Achalgarh, Mt. Abu, Tehsil - Abu Road, District Sirohi.
Rajasthan. - Subsequent Purchaser Truck No. Gj24-U-2516
----Appellant
Versus
1. Bharat Kumar S/o Babulal, By Caste Harijan, Resident Of
(Downloaded on 12/11/2020 at 09:20:59 PM)
(4 of 9) [CMA-2865/2017]
Delwara Kojra, Tehsil - Pindwara, District Sirohi
Rajasthan.
2. Abhay Singh Deora S/o Naga Singh, By Caste - Rajput,
Resident Of Jeetpura, Bhinmal, District Jalore. - Driver
Truck No. Gj24-U-2516
3. Avtar Singh Chawda S/o Kartar Singh, Resident Of House
No. 3, Dev Harsh Bnaglow, Behind Lemdi, Hotel,
Meethakhali, Ahmedabad, Gujrat. - Owner Truck No.
Gj24-U-2516
4. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Through Its
Divisional Manager, In Front Of Lic, Chandel Building,
Mandia Road, District - Pali Rajasthan. - Insurer Truck No.
Gj24-U-2516
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. B.L. Tiwari & Mr. Akshya Tiwari
(in Appeal Nos. 2865/2017,
2863/2017, 2864/2017)
Mr. S.K. Sankhla (in Appeal
Nos.901/2018, 902/2018 &
903/2018)
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ravi Panwar for claimants
Mr. D.S.Nimla for Oriental Insurance
Company
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
ORDER
Date of Pronouncement :- 12/11/2020 Order Reserved on :- 10/11/2020
The matters come up for orders on the stay applications filed in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal Nos.2865/2017, 2863/2017, 2864/2017, 901/2018, 902/2018 & 903/2018.
Sufficiently stated facts relevant and essential for disposal of the stay applications are noted herein below:- (Downloaded on 12/11/2020 at 09:20:59 PM)
(5 of 9) [CMA-2865/2017] The appellant Avtar Singh is the registered owner of the offending vehicle i.e. Truck No. GJ-24-U-2516, which was involved in the road accident dated 06.05.2012 that took place at Delwara- Oriya Road in which the Truck collided with the Motorcycle No. RJ. 24 S.E. 0095 on which Babulal, Parwati Devi and Bharat Kumar were travelling. As a result of the collision, Babulal and Parwati died on the spot, whereas Bharat Kumar sustained injuries. An FIR pertaining to the accident was lodged at the Police Station Abu Parvat. Two separate claim applications (Nos.195/2012 & 196/2012) were filed by the dependents of Babulal and one by the injured Bharat Kumar (No.197/2012) impleading Abhay Singh Deora, the driver, Avtar Singh Chhabra, registered owner, Panku Devi, the alleged transferee of the offending vehicle and the insurer Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. as respondents. The respondent Insurance Company, took a pertinent plea in its reply that the vehicle was not being plied under a valid permit because the permit which was relied upon by the respondents was issued by the Regional Transport Authority, Ahmedabad whereas the accident took place within the jurisdiction of the Rajasthan State.
After examining the issues on the basis of the evidence led by the parties, the Tribunal concluded that the vehicle in question was registered in the name of Avtar Singh and was in possession and ownership of Panku Devi under a lawful agreement and the process of the transfer was underway but formal transfer of the vehicle had not been made in the name of Panku Devi, who procured the fresh insurance cover note in the name of the registered owner Avtar Singh. A pertinent finding was recorded by the Tribunal that the vehicle was being plied in Rajasthan without a valid permit and thus, there was a breach of policy condition and (Downloaded on 12/11/2020 at 09:20:59 PM) (6 of 9) [CMA-2865/2017] accordingly, the Insurance Company was not responsible to make payment of compensation to the claimants and accordingly, it was exonerated from satisfying the claim. However, as the Insurance Company had been impleaded as a party respondent in the claim, it was directed to make payment of the compensation to the claimants and recover the same from the appellants Avtar Singh and Panku Devi.
The appellants Avtar Singh and Panku Devi have filed the appeals (Nos. 2865/2017, 2863/2017, 2864/2017, 901/2018, 902/2018 & 903/2018) assailing the findings recorded by the Tribunal on the issue that there was a breach of policy condition and so also against the direction given by the Tribunal that the Insurance Company would be at liberty to recover the amount of compensation from both Avtar Singh and Panku Devi after reimbursing the claim of the claimants.
I have heard the arguments advanced by Shri B.L.Tiwari & Shri Akshay Tiwari, learned counsel representing the appellant Avtar Singh, Shri S.K. Sankhla, learned counsel representing the appellant Panku Devi, Shri D.S. Nimla, Advocate representing the respondent Insurance Company and Shri Ravi Panwar, Advocate representing the claimants.
The pertinent submission of Shri Tiwari and Shri Sankhla was that a permit to ply the vehicle had been issued by the Regional Transport Authority, Ahmedabad and which was valid from 14.05.2009 till 13.05.2014. Thus, as per the learned counsel for the appellants, the finding recorded by the Tribunal that there was a breach of policy conditions on the ground that the vehicle was not being plied under a valid permit is perverse. In addition, fervent contention of Shri Tiwari, Advocate representing the (Downloaded on 12/11/2020 at 09:20:59 PM) (7 of 9) [CMA-2865/2017] appellant Avtar Singh, was that the direction given by the Tribunal to the effect that the Insurance Company would be at liberty to recover the amount of compensation from the appellant Avtar Singh simply because he continued to be the registered owner of the vehicle is illegal and contrary to the facts because admittedly, Avtar Singh had executed a valid lawful agreement for transfer of the offending vehicle in favour of Panku Devi long before the accident took place and an intimation to this effect had also been given to Regional Transport Authority concerned. In support of the submissions advanced before this Court, Shri B.L. Tiwari placed reliance on the following judgments:-
1. HDFC Bank Ltd. vs. Kumari Reshma : AIR 2015 SC 290
2. National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Deepa Devi& Ors. : AIR 2008 SC 735
3. Raj Kumar Dey & Ors. vs. Tarapada Dey & Ors. : AIR 1987 SC 2195
4. BHS Industries vs. Export Credit Guarantee Corporation & Ors. : AIR 2015 SC 2824
5. Ranjana Pandey vs. Iqbal : 2014 (3) WLN 91 (Raj.) The fervent plea of Shri B.L Tiwari was that as Panku Devi is the true owner of the vehicle, only she was liable to reimburse the amount of compensation and not the appellant Avtar Singh.
Shri Sankhla, learned counsel representing Panku Devi submitted that there is no rational behind the finding of the Tribunal that the vehicle was being plied without a valid permit or that there was a breach of policy condition.
Per contra, Shri D.S. Nimla, Advocate representing the Insurance Company, placed reliance on the Supreme Court (Downloaded on 12/11/2020 at 09:20:59 PM) (8 of 9) [CMA-2865/2017] judgment in the case of Rani & Ors. v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. : 2018 AIR SC 983 and urged that permit for plying a vehicle in one State cannot be considered to be valid if the accident takes place in another State. He also placed reliance on the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Naveen Kumar v. Vijay Kumar & Ors. : 2018 ACJ 677 and urged that in view of Section 2(30) of the Motor Vehicle Act, a person in whose name the vehicle stands registered is continues to be the owner for the purposes of Motor Vehicle Act and it is he who would be liable to make payment of compensation irrespective of the fact that there is a successive transfer through agreements.
I have given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced at bar and have gone through the impugned award.
Suffice it to say that the finding recorded by the Tribunal regarding the vehicle being plied without a valid permit is substantiated upon a perusal of the Goods Carriage Permit (Ex.A/15) which was issued by the Regional Transport Authority, Ahmedabad on 14.05.2009. Under this permit, the offending vehicle i.e., the Truck No.GJ-24-U-2516 was permitted to be plied to carry goods on hire "within the Gujarat State" from 14.05.2009 to 13.05.2014. Thus, apparently, the vehicle was not being plied under a valid permit because the accident took place in the State of Rajasthan. This view is fortified by the ratio of the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Rani (supra). Regarding the contention of Shri Tiwari that the appellant Avtar Singh had sold the vehicle to Panku Devi and thus, direction could not have been issued 'to pay and recover' the amount from his client, I am of the opinion that keeping in view the affirmative view of the Hon'ble (Downloaded on 12/11/2020 at 09:20:59 PM) (9 of 9) [CMA-2865/2017] Supreme Court in the cases of Naveen Kumar (supra) and Prakash Chand Daga vs. Saveta Sharma & Ors. : 2019 ACJ 1, there cannot be two views on the issue that even if there exists a valid agreement for transfer of a motor vehicle, it would not absolve the party in whose name the vehicle stands registered in the records. The contention of Shri Tiwari that the word 'Owner' has to be interpreted contextually in view of the documents of transfer would have to be examined when the appeal is being finally heard.
However, considered from any angle, the direction given by the Tribunal that the Insurance Company would be at liberty to recover the amount of award from either Panku Devi or Avtar Singh would not cause any irreparable loss to either of them because in the event of the appeals being accepted, the appellants would be at liberty to recover the amount from the Insurance Company. Thus, I find no merit in the stay applications which are dismissed as such.
(SANDEEP MEHTA),J Sudhir Asopa (Downloaded on 12/11/2020 at 09:20:59 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)