K. Sreedhar Rao, J.
1. Tribunal has awarded compensation to the petitioners in M.V.C, No. 1559 of 2000 for death of one Rangaswamy. Tribunal directed the owner-dealer to pay the compensation. Claim against the insurer is dismissed.
2. Facts disclose that M/s. Bajaj Transport Limited is the marketing wing of the manufacturer. The appellant is the dealer. The appellant placed indent for delivery of vehicles at Davanagere. The appellant entered into contract with M/s. Chandru Transport for delivery of the vehicles from Pune to Davanagere. The 5th respondent has issued a transit policy. The vehicle in question is a tempo tax, a passenger service vehicle but the vehicle was yet to be registered as a public service vehicle as on the date of transit and the accident. The driver of the tempo tax permitted the deceased to travel in the tempo. During the course of journey, the accident occurred. The Tribunal dismissed the claim against the insurer on the ground that the transit permit does not create legal liability on the insurer to pay compensation and directed the appellant-dealer to pay the compensation.
3. The facts stated in the appeal grounds clearly 'disclose that the vehicles were delivered to the agent of the appellant viz., Chandru Transport with whom the appellant had entered into contract for delivery at Davanagere. Therefore, delivery of the vehicles by the manufacturer to Chandru Transport is deemed in law as delivery to the appellant. The transport was at the risk of the appellant and while the vehicle was in the custody of the agent of the appellant the accident occurred. Therefore, the award made against the appellant is sound and proper.
4. If there is any breach of conditions on the part of the agent M/s. Chandru Transport or any breach of the terms on the part of the manufacturer, the appellant is at liberty to proceed against them for reimbursement but appellant cannot avoid liability to compensate.
5. The deceased is a dry-cleaner. His income is assessed at Rs. 1.500/-per month. Wife and children are the petitioners. As per unit system, Rs. 375/- to be defrayed towards personal expenses. Total loss of dependency would be Rs. 1,75,000/- (1125 x 12 x 13 multiplier). First petitioner is entitled to Rs. 10,000/- for loss of consortium. Petitioners are together entitled to Rs. 10,000/- for loss of expectancy and Rs. 3,000/-for funeral expenses. Deceased was under treatment before he succumbed to injuries. Medical bills are produced for Rs. 2,000/-. In all, claimant is entitled to Rs. 20.000/- for medical and incidental expenses. Total compensation payable to the petitioners would be Rs. 2,18,500/-whereas the Tribunal has awarded a higher compensation of Rs. 2,60,000/-. Hence, the appeal does not call for enhancement.
Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.