The liability of the insurer does not cease so far as the third party/victim is concerned, even if the owner or purchaser does not give any intimation as required under the provisions of the Act.

Aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 04.04.2013, made in MCOP.No.67 of 2012, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruppur, in awarding a sum of Rs.7,97,735/- as against the claim of Rs.12,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by the claimant, the appellant-Insurance Company has filed the present appeal on the ground of liability and quantum.

2. Background of the facts in a nutshell are as follows:

On 02.08.2012, at about 8.30 hrs., while the claimant was walking on the road near his house from south to north of VOC Nagar, 1st street, Triupur, a vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-37-AP-0525 driven by the driver of the second respondent in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the claimant and as a result, he sustained grievous injuries all over his body. Immediately after the accident, he was admitted in Ganga Medical Centre and Hospital, Coimbatore, from 02.08.2012 to 16.08.2012. He claimed a sum of Rs.12,00,000/- as compensation.

3. After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal held that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the second respondent and awarded a sum of Rs.7,97,735/- with interest at 7.5% per annum. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant/Insurance Company has filed the present appeal.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant Insurance Company submitted that the vehicle involved in the accident bearing Registration No.TN-37-AP-0525 was not driven by the owner who has taken the insurance policy, instead it was driven by one Mr. Viswanathan who was holding learner's license, that too without having any instructor with him for assistance which is against the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. It is further submitted that prior to the accident i.e. on 02.08.2012, the owner of the vehicle/second respondent herein sold the same to one Mr. Venkatachalam, on 08.02. 2011 and thereafter, the vehicle along with necessary forms for transfer were handed over to him, therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation as the said vehicle sold to one Mr. Venkatachalam has not been properly intimated to them as required under the provisions of the Act. It is his further contention that unless it is proved by evidence that the vehicle has been transferred in the name of Venkatachalam, the provision of Section 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act would not be applicable, because, in the absence of such evidence on record, this Court should absolve the insurance company from the liability, hence, the award passed by the Tribunal in fixing liability on the Insurance Company is liable to be set aside, however, on the contrary, the owner of the vehicle should be made liable to pay the compensation.

5. Assailing the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, learned counsel for the appellant Insurance Company submitted that when there is no evidence to show that the claimant was working as Iron Master in Shanmuga Textiles, Tirupur, and was earning a sum of Rs.12,000/- per month, the Tribunal ought not to have fixed his monthly salary at Rs.6,000/- per month at the rate of Rs.200/- per day. It is his further submission that as there is no functional disability for the claimant, merely accepting the disability certificate issued by the Doctor-P.W.3 certifying 75% disability, the Tribunal ought not to have awarded a sum of Rs.4,03,200/- towards disability, apart from awarding exorbitant amount under various heads. On this basis, he prayed for interference of the award passed by the Tribunal.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the owner of the vehicle/second respondent herein submitted that the second respondent is not the owner of the vehicle in question, as he had sold the vehicle to one Mr. Venkatachalam, residing at No.1, Ambal Theatre Back side, Singanallur, Coimbatore, on 08.02.2011, for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- and on the same date, the vehicle along with necessary fo