The insurance company is liable to indemnify the owner of a vehicle for damages caused by an accident, even if the policy was issued before the transfer of ownership of the vehicle, provided that the policy was valid and in force at the time of the accident.

( 1 ) THESE first appeals from order arise out of proceedings in a motor accidents claim petition under Section 110a of the M. V. Act, 1939.

( 2 ) ONE Chintamani was killed in an accident with a bus. The descendants of the deceased filed a claim petition and the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 78,000 with costs and interest at the rate of 9% per annum against the owner and the driver of the bus and the insurance company.

( 3 ) TWO appeals have been filed. Appeal No. 512 of 1976 has been filed by the New India assurance Co. Ltd. , the insurer. Appeal No. 493 of 1976 has been filed by the alleged driver and the owner.

( 4 ) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties at some length. The case of the claimants was that on May 19, 1973, the deceased was going on his motor cycle from Ghiror to Mainpuri on Agra-Mainpuri Road. When he reached a place near Auran Mandal about 4 kms. from mainpuri, at about 5 p. m. bus No. PNQ 2687 coming from the side of Mainpuri dashed against the motor cycle, as a result of which he fell down and became unconscious. The bus did not stop and speeded away. Another bus No. UPG. 3103 was coming from the side of Ghiror, picked up the injured in an unconscious state and took him to the District Hospital, Mainpuri. The injured succumbed to the injuries at 5-55 p. m. the same day.

( 5 ) THE claim petition was filed against the insurance company and three others, Soney Singh, jaddoo Siggh and Shyam Baboo, mentioned as owners. Soney Singh claimed that he had transferred the bus to Shyam Babu Gupta earlier and he had no concern with the bus at the time of the accident. Jaddoo Singh was alleged to be the driver. Shyam Babu admitted that he was the owner of the bus, but the bus was being driven by another driver, Vidya Ram, and not Jaddoo singh. He also claimed that he was sitting in the bus at the alleged time of occurrence and no accident took place with it. Jaddoo Singh alias Jagvir Singh denied that he was driving the bus, but admitted that a case under Section 304a of the IPC was going on against him for the said occurrence.

( 6 ) THE insurance company claimed that it was not liable to pay any compensation to the claimants. No notice of the accident was served on any opposite party. The bus was being driven very cautiously and slowly. The accident was due to the lack of proper care and caution on the part of the deceased motor cyclist himself. The motor cycle was being driven rashly and negligently and the deceased had no licence to drive the motor cycle. At the time of accident, the registered owner of the bus was Mr. Soney Singh and not Shyam Babu. The bus was being driven against the provisions of the policy without the consent and authority of the owner by a person who was not having a valid driving licence and was not under the employment of the insured owner. The Tribunal framed four issues which are as under :

1. If the death of the deceased was caused due to accident arising out of the use of bus No. PNQ 2687 ? If so, was the bus being driven rashly and negligently : or if the death of the deceased was caused due to his own rashness and negligence ? 2. If at the time of the accident, the bus under reference was being driven against the provisions of the policy and permit without the authority of the insured by a person not holding a licence of driving and the insurance company is accordingly absolved of its liability under the policy ? 3. If the insured owner had transferred the bus to Sone Lal and Jaddoo Singh was the insurance company accordingly absolved of its liability ? 4. For what amount of compensation and against whom is the appli cant entitled ? issues Nos. 3 and 4 were wrongly numbered as issues Nos. 4 and 5.

( 7 ) ON issues Nos. 1 and 2, the Tribunal came to a finding that the accident took place with the bus in question. That it was being driven by Jaddoo Singh rashly and negligently. That Jaddoo singh, who was driving the bus, had a valid driving licence and, consequently, the ins