PRAKASH CHAND DAGA versus SAVETA SHARMA & ORS.

PRAKASH CHAND DAGA versus SAVETA SHARMA & ORS.

Even though the vehicle was sold and delivered to the first respondent, Prakash Chand Daga, as the registered owner under Section 2(30) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, remained liable to third parties for compensation as his name continued in the RTO records since the statutory requirements under Section 50 were...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Prakash Chand Daga; First Respondent: Saveta Sharma; Second Respondent: Rakesh Kumar
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
14 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Decision in Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Motor Vehicles Act – Liability After Sale, Compensation Claims – Ownership Determination, Claims Tribunal Procedure
Motor Vehicles Law Tort Law Motor Vehicles Act – Liability After Sale Compensation Claims – Ownership Determination Claims Tribunal Procedure

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Prakash Chand Daga

Appellant

Saveta Sharma

First Respondent

Rakesh Kumar

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Decision in Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the registered owner remains liable for compensation after sale of vehicle but before transfer of registration under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
  2. 2 Interpretation of Sections 2(30), 50 and 177 of the Motor Vehicles Act regarding ownership and indemnity in accident claims.

Ratio Decidendi

Even though the vehicle was sold and delivered to the first respondent, Prakash Chand Daga, as the registered owner under Section 2(30) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, remained liable to third parties for compensation as his name continued in the RTO records since the statutory requirements under Section 50 were not completed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Award of compensation as modified by the High Court affirmed: the Insurance Company is liable to make compensation to the claimant and has recovery rights against the registered owner; no costs.