Belated information regarding transfer of ownership of the vehicle given to authorities.

P. SATHASIVAM,J

The claimant in MACT.O.P.No.251 of 1996 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Panrutti is the appellant in the above appeal.

2. In respect of grievous injuries caused to him in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 26.01.1995, he prayed for a compensation of Rs.2 lakhs. Before the Tribunal, the claimant himself was examined as P.W.1 and Dr. Nandakumar as P.W.2. He also marked Exs.P.1 to P.12 in support of his claim for compensation. On the side of the respondents, first respondent - Sankarlal Jain was examined as R.W.1 and marked Exs.R.1 to R.3 in support of their defence. The Tribunal, after holding that the accident was caused due to the negligence of the rider of the motor cycle, TN-31 A 0397, passed an award for Rs.42,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit and directed the second respondent therein - R. Sundaramoorthy, to pay the said amount. The Tribunal, has dismissed the claim against the first respondent. Questioning the said award, particularly dismissing the claim against the first respondent, the claimant / appellant has filed the above appeal.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as respondents.

4. The only point for consideration in this appeal is, whether the appellant - claimant is entitled to an award against the first respondent - transferor of the vehicle in question or the Tribunal is right in passing an award against the second respondent - transferee of the vehicle.

5. The appellant - claimant has specifically stated that on 26.01.1995, when he was riding his motor cycle PY-01 A 2586 from K.R. Motor Cycle Workshop, Panrutti on the Panruti - Madras Main Road, while he was nearing Dr. P.M.R. Mani Hospital, at about 14.45 hours, another motor cycle, bearing registration No.TN-31 A 0397, which came behind his (claimant) vehicle driven by one Chakravarthy in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against his motor cycle, as a result of the accident, the claimant had a fracture on his lateral left tibia and grievous injury on his left ear, he prayed for a compensation of Rs.2 lakhs. Initially, he impleaded the first respondent - Sankarlal Jain, as owner of the motor cycle TN-31 A 0397. The first respondent filed a counter statement, wherein it is stated that on the date of accident, namely 26.01.1995, he was not the owner of the vehicle nor he caused the accident. In para 4, it is stated that he sold the motor cycle to one Sundaramoorthy, S/o. Rathina Chettiar, No.210, Madras Road, L.N. Puram, Panrutti Taluk. By furnishing the said information, first respondent has stated that he is not liable to pay compensation amount to the claimant. Based on the said information, R. Sundaramoorthy has been impleaded as second respondent. The second respondent has filed a counter statement, wherein he has stated that he has purchased the vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-31 A 0397 only on 15.01.1995. It is also stated that one Chakkarai had taken the vehicle and committed accident on 26.01.1995. It is further stated that the said Chakkarai is necessary and proper party for the disposal of the claim petition.

6. Let us consider the materials placed, relevant discussion and the ultimate conclusion regarding the question in dispute, namely whether the first respondent - transferor is liable or the second respondent - transferee is liable to pay the award amount? To this aspect, we have to consider the evidence of P.W.1, the evidence of first respondent as R.W.1 and Exs.R.1 to R.3 marked through R.W.1.

7. Before the Tribunal, R.W.1 has stated that he had sold the motor cycle to the second respondent on 15.01.1995 and also produced the sale letter for cash payment - Ex.R.1 dated 15.01.1995. We have already referred to the fact that the second respondent in his counter statement has admitted that he purchased the motor cycle on 15.01.1995. Though he has filed a counter statement by engaging a counsel, thereafter, he did