In Brief
The review petitioner sought to challenge a Supreme Court order requiring him to deposit Rs. 4,50,000 in a motor accident claims case. He argued that he had sold the vehicle in question to the second respondent on 16 March 2006, before the accident occurred. Under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, the sale transferred ownership and he was no longer liable. The Court found this admission by the second respondent created an error apparent on the record. The petition was allowed and the deposit requirement was set aside, with the award's operation stayed for six months.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.