On an application filed by the petitioner, respondent was ordered to be served by way of substituted service.  Petitioner has filed proof of publication.  Respondent is not present.  Ordered to be proceeded ex parte.

          Respondent/complainant purchased a Tata Sumo from Ambassador Tours and Travels and got its registration transferred in her name on 29.7.2004.  The vehicle was got insured by Ambassador Tours and Travels on 8.6.2004 and the said policy was valid till 7.6.2005.  The vehicle met with an accident on 4.9.2004 at about 6.30 AM.  Vehicle suffered substantial damage.  Till 4.9.2004, the policy had not been transferred in the name of the respondent. Respondent got the policy transferred in her name on 9.9.2004 and thereafter lodged claim with the petitioner on 13.9.2004, which repudiated the same on the ground that the respondent did not have an insurable interest as the policy had not been transferred in her favour on the date of the accident.

          Aggrieved by this, respondent filed a complaint before the District Forum.  District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.1,45,404.83p. to the respondent along with interest at the rate of 12% with effect from 20.9.2004 till realization.  Rs.5,000/- were awarded by way of compensation and costs.

          Aggrieved by the order passed by the District Forum, petitioner filed an appeal before the State Commission, which has been dismissed. 

Counsel for the petitioner relying upon two judgements of the Supreme Court in (i) M/s.Complete Insulations (P) Ltd. vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. – AIR 1196 SC 586 and (ii) G.Govindan vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. – 1999 ACJ 781 to contend that till the transfer of the policy in the name of the transferee, no agreement comes into existence to compensate the transferee for the loss caused to the vehicle and the insurer would not be liable to make good the damage to the vehicle.  The fiction created by Section 157 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 to compensate is limited to the third party risks only.  It is contended that till the transfer of the policy in the name of the transferee, the insurance company is not liable to make good the damage to the vehicle. 

We find substance in this submission.  Supreme Court in the aforesaid two judgements has clearly laid down that the fiction created by Section 157 is limited to third parties risks only.  That the transferee cannot be said to be third party qua the vehicle.  That till the transfer of the vehicle in the name of the transferee, the insurance company is not liable to make good to the damage caused to the vehicle, as there is no agreement between the insurer or the transferee to cover the risk/damage to the vehicle.  The principle laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court is that in the absence of an agreement between the insurer and the insured undertaking to cover the risk/damage to the vehicle, the insurer is not liable to compensate for the loss caused.

Respectfully following the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid two judgements, we allow this Revision Petition and set aside the orders passed by the fora below.  Complaint is ordered to be dismissed with no order as to costs.

Revision Petition stands disposed of in above terms.