D. S. Zoting, J.

1. 1. Heard Mr. R.M. Borde, learned Counsel for the appellant. Mr. C.V. Thombre, learned Counsel for respondent No. 1 and Mr. S.K. Naikwade, learned Counsel, for respondent No. 2.

2. Admit.

With consent of the parties, taken up for hearing forthwith.

2. 3. Being aggrieved by the Judgment and Award dated 3-8-2001 passed by the Major Accident Claims Tribunal, Beed in

M. A. C. 228/2000, below Exh. 5 granting interim relief in favour of the original claimant (respondent No. 1) directing the driver as well as the owner to pay the said amount to the original claimant.

4. The original claimant filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for grant of compensation on account of the permanent disability sustained by him in a vehicular accident that had taken place on 7-1-2000. Jeep

bearing registration No. MH-12/A-4559 is involved in the accident. Present respondent No. 2 is the owner of the vehicle, whereas the appellant is the driver of the said jeep.

2. 5. The grievance of the appellant (driver) is that while granting interim relief under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicle Act though the owner and Insurance Company (if the vehicle is insured) are the only necessary parties to the said proceedings, award came to be passed against the driver also. Mr. R. M. Borde, the learned Counsel for the appellant (driver) has placed reliance on the provisions of Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 as well as Sub-rule (3) of Rule 260 of the Maharashtra Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989.

3. 6. Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, reads as under :

"(1) Where death or permanent disablement of any

person has resulted from an accident arising out of the

use of a motor vehicle or motor vehicles, the owner of

the vehicle shall, or, as the case may be, the owners

of the vehicles shall, jointly and severally, be liable to

pay compensation in respect of such death or

disablement in accordance with the provisions of this

section.

(2)...................

(3).................

(4)...................

.(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section

.(2) regarding death or bodily injury to any person, for which the owner of the vehicle is liable to give compensation for relief, he is also liable to pay compensation under any other law for the time being

in force :

(Provided that the amount of such

compensation to be given under any other law

shall be reduced from the amount of

compensation payable under this section or

under Section 163A).

On careful reading of the section, it is abundantly clear that driver does not come in the picture while deciding application under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The section clearly reveals that it is the responsibility of the owner of the vehicle involved in an accident to give compensation for the relief together with the joint and several liability of the Insurance Company, in case the vehicle is insured with it.

7. This is also further made clear from Sub-rule (3) of Rule 260 of the Maharashtra Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, which reads as under:

"(3) Where the applicant makes a claim for

compensation under Section 140, the Claims Tribunal

shall give notice to the owner and insurer, if any, of

the vehicle involved in the accident directing them to

appear on the date, not later than fifteen days from

the date of issue of such notice. The date so fixed for

such appearance shall also be not later than fifteen

days from the receipt of the claim application filed by

the claimant. The Claims Tribunal shall state in such

notice that in case they fail to appear on such

appointed date, the Claims Tribunal shall proceed ex

parte on the presumption that they have no

contention to make against the award of

compensation."

A careful reading of the Sub-rule (3) of this Rule shows that the Tribunal shall give notice in respect of the claim or compensation under Section 140, to the owner and insurer. This sub-rule does not speak for giving notice to the driver.

8. Thu