[aftab alam; r.m. lodha, jj.]motor vehicles act, (mv act) 1988 - sections 157; motor vehicles act, (mv act) 1939 - sections 2(30), 50 - transfer of certificate of insurance -- it earlier belonged to one jitender gupta who was its registered owner. jitender gupta sold the truck to salig ram on february 2, 1993 and gave its possession to the transferee. despite the sale of the vehicle by jitender gupta to salig ram, the change of ownership of the vehicle was not entered in its certificate of registration. later on, however, salig ram took out an insurance policy for the truck from oriental insurance company ltd. bearing policy no.31/94/00628. 4. the heirs and legal representatives of both the deceased, prem chand and nikku ram filed separate claim applications before the motor accident claims tribunal, solan, himachal pradesh. in both the claim applications salig ram, the transferee was impleaded as respondent no.1, jitender gupta, the original owner of the truck as respondent no.2 and oriental insurance company ltd. as respondent no.3. it further held that even though an insurance policy for the truck was taken out from oriental insurance company ltd., the policy was in the name of jitender gupta, who was no longer the owner of the truck on the date the policy was taken out and there was no privity of contract between salig ram, the owner of the truck and the insurance company. against the judgment and award made by the claims tribunal the claimants filed appeals before the himachal pradesh high court being fao no.459 of 2000 (by the heirs and legal representatives of prem chand) and fao no.77 of 1999 (by the heirs and legal representatives of nikku ram). transfer of ownership.
(where the ownership of any motor vehicle registered under this chapter is transferred, the insurance company has chosen not to file any appeal. save and except the legal ownership, the registered owner of the vehicle had lost all control over the vehicle. v. ramkumar, j.bail application no. 7344 of 2010 dated: 10th november, 2010order1. petitioner who is the 8th accused in crime no. 115 of 2004 of east kallada police station for an offence punishable under section 397 i.p.c. seeks anticipatory bail. 2. consequent on the non-appearance of the petitioner in s.c. no. 959/2006 on the file of the addl. district & sessions court (adhic - i) kollam, non-bailable warrants of arrest are pending against the petitioner. anticipatory bail cannot be granted to nullify the process issued by a court of competent jurisdiction. there is no reason why the petitioner should not surrender before the sessions court and seek regular bail. accordingly, if the petitioner surrenders before the sessions court and files an application for regular bail within two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and disposed of preferably on the same day on which it is filed notwithstanding the pendency of non-bailable warrants of arrest against the petitioner and also after considering the explanation offered by the petitioner for his previous non-appearance. 3. with the above observation this application is disposed of.