Hire purchase ownership under motor vehicle law turns on possession and control, not merely registration entries

In a hire purchase arrangement, the definition of "owner" under the Motor Vehicles Act is contextual and ordinarily points to the person in possession and control of the vehicle. Mere inclusion of the financer's name in the registration certificate does not, by itself, make the financer liable to satisfy a compensation award under the claims provisions. The Tribunal must look to actual use, possession, control and vicarious responsibility when identifying the liable person. On that basis, a financer without possession or control is not ordinarily fastened with liability for an accident claim.

---

---

Issues: Whether a financer under a hire purchase arrangement is the owner of a motor vehicle within the meaning of Section 2(30) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and thereby liable to satisfy an award of compensation under Section 168 of the Act.

Analysis: The definition of "owner" in Section 2(30) is contextual and, in the case of a vehicle subject to a hire purchase agreement, the person in possession of the vehicle is ordinarily treated as the owner. Mere entry of the financer's name in the registration certificate is not where the vehicle remains in the possession and control of the hirer. The scheme of Sections 165, 166 and 168 requires the Tribunal to identify the person liable on the basis of use, possession, control and vicarious responsibility. The financer, absent possession or control, cannot ordinarily be fastened with liability for compensation merely because its name appears in the registration records.

Conclusion: The financer was not the owner liable to pay compensation and could not be made responsible for the accident claim.

Ratio Decidendi: In a hire purchase situation, liability under the Motor Vehicles Act follows actual possession and control of the vehicle, and not the mere registration entry of the financer's name.

---