( 1. ) THIS appeal is by the claimant aggrieved by dismissal of claim petition as per award dated 22. 9. 2000 passed by Second Addl. Motor Accidents claims Tribunal, Dabra, District Gwalior in Claim Case No. 36 of 2000,

( 2. ) THE claimant filed a claim petition for claiming compensation with respect to an accident dated 31. 12. 1995 which took place at about 6. 15 p. m. near village Hans-khedi. When the claimant was travelling on yamaha motor cycle along with Malvendra singh and was going to Dabra, jeep (No. MP 04-G 0404)came from Dabra side, it was driven by Virendra Kumar, owned by hargovind and insured with Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. , dashed the motor cycle, claimant sustained compound fractures of tibia and fibula, report of accident was lodged, an offence was registered under sections 279 and 337, Indian Penal Code after due investigation, driver of the jeep was charge-sheeted. Right leg of claimant has become incapacitated, claimant was a contractor earning Rs. 10,000 per month, compensation of Rs. 7,00,000 was claimed.

( 3. ) THE driver and owner of the jeep remained ex pane. Insurer in the written statement contended that driver of the jeep was not having valid and effective driving licence, jeep was not involved in the accident, policy was issued in the name of j. N. Tiwari for the period up to 7. 9. 1996, insurance was not transferred in the name of Hargovind after sale of jeep to him. ( 4. ) CLAIMS Tribunal has found that involvement of jeep has not been

established, it was found that registered owner of the vehicle was Hargovind but the policy was not transferred in the name of Hargovind, the compensation of Rs. 22,000 has been determined, but it has not been awarded as claim petition has been dismissed.

( 5. ) MR. M. P. Agrawal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted that compensation ought to have been awarded as there was unrebutted evidence adduced by the claimant with respect to involvement of jeep. Insurer, driver and owner have failed to adduce the evidence in rebuttal, registered owner was hargovind, merely by non-transfer of policy, insurer could not have been absolved from its liability to make payment of compensation, just compensation be awarded in the facts and circumstances of the case.

( 6. ) MR. V. K. Bhardwaj appearing with mr. Anand Bhardwaj and Mr. Raja Sharma have supported the award passed by the claims Tribunal.

( 7. ) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties, in my opinion, the award passed by Claims Tribunal cannot be allowed to sustain for various reasons. The finding recorded as to non-involvement of vehicle in question is also perverse. No doubt about it that in the F. I. R. number of the vehicle was not mentioned, however, on due investigation police has found involvement of vehicle in question in the accident, it was seized and handed over on supurdnama to the registered owner. Apart from that there is unrebutted evidence furnished by claimant Nandan Tiwari, CW 2. He has stated that driver of the jeep in question was driving it in drunken condition and dashed the motor cycle, that was the cause of sustaining the injury. His statement has been supported by Malvendra Singh, CW 3. There is absolutely nothing to discard the statements of aforesaid witnesses. No evidence in rebuttal has been adduced by driver, owner and insurer. Thus, it is held that accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving by driver of the jeep and the jeep in question was involved in the accident.

( 8. ) COMING to factum of transfer of vehicle. It has been found that vehicle stood transferred in the name of Hargovind and he was the registered owner. Once he was a registered owner, it was not necessary that insurer should have been informed about transfer of the vehicle. In the absence of information to the insurer with respect to transfer of vehicle, insurer is not absolved from the liability as held by Full bench of this court in National Insurance co. Ltd. v. Kans Ram, 20