The court established that a registered vehicle owner remains liable for accidents even if the vehicle is sold and not registered in another's name, emphasizing victim protection under the law.

ORDER :

ANOOP KUMAR DHAND, J.

1. By way of filing the instant appeal, a challenge has been led to the impugned award dated 06.12.2022 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 2, Jaipur Metropolitan-I (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) by which the Claim Petition No. 504/2016 filed by the claimant-appellant (for short, ‘the claimant’) has been partly allowed and the respondent No. 3 i.e. Superintendent of Police, Udaipur has been exonerated from its liability.

2. Counsel appearing on behalf of the claimant submitted that on the date of incident, i.e. 24.03.2016, the claimant was riding on a motor bike bearing No. RJ-14-BW-0358 as a pillion, however, at around 4:30 P.M in the evening, the driver of the offending vehicle, i.e. respondent No. 1, while driving the jeep bearing No. RJ-27-U-0905, in a rash and negligent manner, caused the accident due to which the claimant sustained multiple grievous injuries on his body. In the aforesaid accident, he also sustained a fracture on left leg, which was determined as 30% permanent disability. Counsel submitted that a claim petition was submitted by the claimant against the respondents for getting adequate compensation before the Tribunal. Counsel submitted that while passing the aforesaid impugned award, the Tribunal has exonerated the respondent No. 3 i.e. Superintendent of Police, Udaipur from its liability to pay compensation on a technical count that although the offending vehicle was registered in the name of respondent No. 3 but the same was not registered in the name of the private individual and the offending vehicle was put to auction, wherein it was purchased by the respondent No.2. Hence, the Tribunal held that the respondent No. 3 is not liable to pay any compensation and on this count alone the respondent No. 3 was exonerated from his liability. Counsel submitted that unless and until, the registration of the vehicle is transferred in the name of the subsequent purchaser, the person who is having his name in the Registration Certificate is only liable and responsible, if such vehicle meets with an accident. In support of his contention, counsel has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Naveen Kumar Vs. Vijay Kumar and Ors. , reported in (2018) 3 SCC 1 . Counsel further submitted that while assessing the income of the claimant, the Tribunal has held that the claimant was a semi-skilled person and applying the notification/circular issued by the Department of Labour, Government of Rajasthan, his minimum wage was determined as Rs. 211/- per day and while taking into account 26 working days in a month, his monthly income was determined as Rs. 5,486/-. Counsel submits that this Court in the case of Nandu Devi and Anr. Vs. Sohanlal and Ors. /b>., while deciding S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 769/2017 on 23.02.2022, has held that in such like matters, the monthly income of a daily wager is required to be calculated for 30 days instead of 26 days. He further submitted that the injured has sustained a fracture on his left leg and has also sustained 30% permanent disability and remained in hospital for a considerable time. In such circumstances, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head of pain and suffering, i.e. Rs. 5000/-, is a very meagre amount and on these counts, the impugned award needs to be suitably enhanced.

3. Per contra, counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 opposed the arguments raised by counsel for the claimant and submitted that the Tribunal has not committed any error in exonerating the respondent No. 3 from his liability to make payment of compensation to the claimant because although th