( 1 ) IN view of the alleged two divergent decisions in C. M. A. No. 588 of 1992 dated 28. 7. 1999 and c. M. A. No. 448 of 1991 dated 7. 6. 2000, the following questions are referred by the learned single Judge for a decision from the Division Bench: (1) What is the effect of the non-presence of the owner of a motor vehicle (insured) at the appellate stage, if the appeal against the owner is dismissed for default for non-payment of batta or for non-compliance with the orders of the court? (2) If the Tribunal records a finding that the accident had taken place due to rash or negligent driving of the motor vehicle by its driver and if such a find ing is not challenged by the insurance company in the appeal, whether there is any need for the presence of the owner of the motor vehicle? (3) In an appeal filed by the insurance company, if the owner of the motor vehicle is not present (i. e. , if the appeal as against the owner is dismissed), what is the effect of the same on the said appeal? (4) In an appeal filed by the claimant, if the insurance company has not filed any cross-appeal, what is the need for the presence of the owner of the motor vehicle?

( 2 ) THE C. M. A