V.K. Gupta, C.J.—Both these connected appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment. A very short question of law has arisen for consideration in these appeals and its resolution depends upon the interpretation that would be given to Section 157 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (Act for short). The facts first. Two Claim petitions being MAC petition Nos. 62-NS/2 of 1994 and 63-NS/2 of 1994 were filed by the legal heirs of two deceased persons claiming compensation for the deaths of the said two deceased persons which resulted because of an accident occurring on May 7, 1994 on Dhararu Dhar road near Bangora, Tehsil Arki, District Solan in the State of Himachal Pradesh involving truck bearing No. HPA-1435. The following seven issues were framed by the Tribunal for adjudication:

1. Whether the death of Shri Nikku Ram and Shri Prem Chand has taken place in a motor - vehicle accident on 7.5.1994 caused by vehicle No. HPA-1435 being driven by Roop Ram deceased in a rash and negligent manner? OPP.

2. If issue No.1. is proved in affirmative, to what amount of compensation are the petitioners entitled to and from whom? OPP.

3. Whether the petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties, as alleged in preliminary objection No. 3 of respondent No. 1? OPR-1.

4. Whether Roop Ram deceased was not authorised to drive the vehicle in question on the date of accident, as alleged in preliminary objection No. 1 by respondent No.1? OPR-1.

5. whether deceased Nikku Ram and Prem Chand were travelling in the truck as unauthorised and gratuitous passengers , if so, its effect? OPR-3.

6. Whether petition is not maintainable against respondent No.3 as alleged in preliminary objection No. 2 by respondent No.3? OPR-3.

7. Relief.

2. Findings on all the aforesaid issues, except with respect, to Issue No.6 went in favour of the claimant-appellants and accordingly in both the claim petitions Awards for Rs. 5,16,000/- and Rs. 2,42,000/- respectively were passed in favour of the claimants. Since however, the finding on Issue No. 6 went in favour of Respondent No.3 Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., the Tribunal in the operative part of the judgment directed that the aforesaid awarded amounts shall be paid to the claimants by respondent No.1 Salig Ram, the owner of the vehicle in question. In these two appeals filed in this Court under Section 173 of the Act, the appellants who were the claimants in the above referred two claim petitions before the Tribunal have confined and restricted their challenge only to that part of the Award dated September 25, 1998 whereby the Tribunal, after deciding Issue No. 6 in favour of respondent No.3, has consequently decided and ordered that the awarded amounts shall be paid by respondent No.1 Salig Ram - the owner of the vehicle, meaning thereby that it shall not be paid by respondent No.3 Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., the insurer of the vehicle in question on the ground that as on the date of the accident respondent No. 3 did not have any insurable interest, in the vehicle in question since, as per the Tribunals finding, the vehicle in question on the date of accident could not be deemed or considered to have been insured with respondent No.

3. Section 157 of the Act reads as under: "157.Transfer of certificate of insurance. (1) Where a person in whose favour the certificate of insurance has been issued in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter transfers to another person the ownership of the motor vehicle in respect of which such insurance was taken together with the policy of insurance relating thereto, the certificate of insurance and the policy described in the certificate shall be deemed to have been transferred in favour of the person to whom the motor vehicle is transferred with effect from the date of its transfer. Explanation.—For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that such deemed transfer shall include transfer of rights and liabilities of the said certificate of insurance and policy o