ORDER Prakash Krishna, J.
1. This appeal is directed under Section 110D of the Motor Vehicles Act, at the instance of the insured persons against the order of the Tribunal dated 20th December, 1977 passed by 1st Additional District Judge, Ghazipur, decreeing respondent 1st set's claim in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 1 of 1973.
2. It arises out of a Motor Accident Claim Case, under the provision of old Motor Vehicles Act. The appellants are the co-owners of the vehicle which was involved in the case. The grievance of the present appellants is that the claims Tribunal has committed illegality in deciding the issue No. 6 by holding that it is open to the claimants to recover the amount from the owners of the bus and owner of the bus may claim indemnity from the Insurance Company. Since only short grievance is involved, therefore, it is not necessary to give the fact of the case in detail.
3. Issue No. 6 reads as follows :
"Whether the respondents or the respondent, if any, is liable to pay compensation said tn issue No. 5?"
4. The Tribunal, by the order under appeal has held that the bus in question, of which the appellants are owners, was insured with M/s. Hindustan General Insurance Society Ltd., now known as the National Insurance Company Ltd. There is no dispute that the said Bus was not insured with the respondent No. 3. The Tribunal under issue No. 6 has come to the conclusion that all the respondents are liable for the payment of the compensation. Thereafter, the Tribunal has observed that if the amount is recovered from the owners, the owners may recover the said amount from the Insurance Company. Challenging this observation, the present appeal has been filed. It was submitted by the appellant that the compensation amount so awarded may be recovered from the insurer and the award be modified accordingly.
5. Section 96 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 corresponds Section 149(1) of the new Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Section 96 (1) of the old Motor Vehicles Act provides that after the issuance of the certificate of insurance, the Insurance Company shall satisfy the award or decree passed by the Tribunal against the insured not exceeding the sum assured as if he were the judgment debtor. See National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nicolletta Rohtagi, 2003 (1) AWC 23 (SC): 2003 (1) SCCD 10 :(2002) 7 SCC 456 (Para 9).
6. The object of Section 96 (1) of the old Motor Vehicles Act is to ensure that third parties who suffer on account of the user of the motor vehicle should get damages for injuries occasioned and that their ability to get the damages should not be dependent on the financial condition of the driver or the owner of the vehicle whose user caused the injuries. It is a substantive provision, which declares the liability of the insurer to pay the claimant. The State has created a liability in the insurer to the injured person. The purpose of insurance is that, In case of an accident the money shall be paid by the Insurance Company with which the vehicle involved in the accident, was insured.
7. The judgment and order of the Tribunal is modified. The Insurance Co. is liable to pay a sum of Rs. 15,000 (Rs. fifteen thousands) as awarded by the Tribunal by way of compensation. The insured persons are not liable to pay the aforesaid amount.
8. The appeal is hereby allowed.