Prasant Kumar v. Most Anita Devi

Heard Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 is directed against the interim award dated 11.5.2010 passed by the learned 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge -cum- Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Tribunal, Saharsa in M.V. Case No. 2 of 2006 whereby the learned Tribunal has directed the appellant herein who is stated to be the owner of the offending vehicle, to make payment of the interim compensation of Rs. 50,000/- under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act. I have heard Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant and I have perused the materials on record. 2 Patna High Court MA No.543 of 2011 (7) dt.24-10-2013 Mr. Mishra with reference to the documents appended in the supplementary affidavit submits that the vehicle in question was sold by the appellant to one Harinandan Prasad Yadav and thus the liability would be of the transferee. In support of his submission learned counsel has relied upon an affidavit sworn before the Notary Public and a sale letter which is on a plain paper. Perusal of the order impugned reflects that the records maintained in the office of the District Transport Officer, Saharsa bears the name of the appellant as the owner of the offending vehicle. In the circumstances, the liability would be that of the appellant. No infirmity can be found the order impugned. The appeal is dismissed. The statutory amount deposited by the appellant may be remitted to the Tribunal for its disbursement in accordance with law. It goes without saying the if the appellant is able to establish before the Tribunal regarding transfer of the vehicle in favour of the Harinandan Prasad Yadav with supportive documents, the Tribunal would be at liberty to pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law. (Jyoti Saran, J) Bibhash/-