The central legal point established in the judgment is that the failure to obtain a permanent registration certificate for a motor vehicle after the expiry of the temporary certificate absolves the insurer from indemnificatory liability.

SURESHWAR THAKUR, J.

1. The Insurer of the offending vehicle, has, instituted the instant appeal before this Court, where through, it, casts, a, challenge, upon, the award pronounced by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Kinnaur at Rampur Bushehar, H.P., upon, MAC Petition No. 0100069 of 2013, (i) whereunder, compensation amount comprised, in, a sum of Rs.21,06, 312/- alongwith interest accrued thereon, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, and, commencing from, the date of petition till realization thereof, stood, assessed, vis-a-vis, the claimants, and, the apposite indemnificatory liability thereof, was, fastened upon the insurer/appellant herein.

2. The learned counsel appearing or the appellant/insurer, has contended (i) that the fastening of apposite indemnificatory liability, upon, insurer being ill-founded, (ii) given the offending vehicle, hence not, in contemporaneity with the ill-fated occurrence, rather possessing a valid registration certificate, and, fitness certificate, for, hence it being plied on the relevant road, (iii) thereupon, hence fundamental breach, of, the terms and conditions of the insurance policy, obviously surging forth, (iv) and, conspicuously with the temporary registration certificate, as, issued by the licencing authority concerned, vis-a-vis, the offending vehicle, being valid only upto 23.07.2010, and, whereafter the owner of the offending vehicle, not, ensuring hence issuance qua the offending vehicle, a valid registration certificate, rather by the registering authority concerned

3. The afore espousal reared by the learned counsel for the appellant, before this Court, is, embedded, upon, Section 39 of the Motor Vehicles Act, provisions whereof stand extracted hereinafter:-

“39. Necessity for registration.-No person shall drive any motor vehicle and no owner of a motor vehicle shall cause or permit the vehicle to be driven in any public place or in any other place unless the vehicle is registered in accordance with this Chapter and the certificate of registration of the vehicle has not been suspended or cancelled and the vehicle carries a registration mark displayed in the prescribed manner”

(i) and, when apparently, the afore contention is well founded, upon, an imperative statutory necessity cast therein, upon, the owner to after expiry of the temporary registration, number, as, assigned, vis-a-vis, the offending vehicle by the licencing authority concerned, to, hence, apply, for his/hers being granted, a, permanent registration certificate, qua, the, apposite vehicle, (ii) and, with there being no endeavour in the afore regard, by the owner of the offending vehicle, besides when in contemporaneity, vis-a-vis, the ill-fated mishap hence involving the offending vehicle, rather taking place, hence, thereat the apposite temporary registration certificate, rather expiring, (iii) thereupon, the apt indemnificatory liability, vis-a-vis, the compensation amount being not amenable for its being fastened, upon, the insurer.

4. Furthermore, the quantification, of damages, by the learned Tribunal, comprised, in a sum of Rs.1 lac, vis-a-vis, the claimants, (i) under the head “loss of estate”, and, quantification, of, compensation, borne in a sum of Rs.50,000/-, under, the head “funeral expense and cost of litigation”, as also quantification, of, compensation in a sum of Rs. One lac, under, the head “loss of consortium” vis-a-vis the petitioner No.1, as well as quantification, of compensation in a sum of Rs.One lac, under, the head “Loss of love and affection”, and, further quantification of compensation borne in a sum of Rs. One lac, under, the head “expectation of life”, is, (a) in, conflict with the mandate of the Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in, (2017) ACJ 2700. (b) wherein, it has been expostulated, that reasonable figures, under conventional heads, namely, loss to estate, loss of consortium, and, funeral expenses be