H. N. TILHARI, J. ( 1 ) HEARD the learned counsel for the appellant Sri c. k. kambeyanda. ( 2 ) THE only point that has been urged in this petition is that insurance company has wrongly been made liable for payment of compensation in m. v. c. No. 477 of 1985. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the claimant-injured as per pleadings in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the 4th respondent, that is the insurance company it has not been liable to pay any damages as far as his person and his vehicle have been concerned, since the claimant was a gratuitous passenger in the lorry bearing No. Gds-5859, on the date of accident. Learned counsel further contended that under the agreement to buy the vehicle, the claimant had acquired the possession and control of the vehicle and there is no dispute about that he was in possession of the lorry concerned and in view of these facts and circumstances, the insurance company was not liable to indemnify or to pay any damages, because he did not come within the definition of third person, the claimant could be said to have stepped into the shoes of the injured. In this view of the matter, no damage could be awarded against the insurance company. ( 3 ) THAT as regards the plea which is sought to be raised at this stage that the claimant was the owner of the vehicle by virtue of the agreement of purchase, in my opinion has got no substance. Agreement to purchase and the agreement of purchase or contract of purchase or contract of sale and contract to sell, they stand on a different footing. contract of sale or agreement of contract of purchase is a completed transaction of sale or purchase. It may be according to the requirements of law - oral or written. But where there is a case of only agreement to sell or agreement to purchase, means parties have agreed to enter into transaction of sale or purchase, which has to be entered subsequently and that transaction of sale or purchase has not yet come into existence. It may be according to the requirements of law - oral or written. But where there is a case of only agreement to sell or agreement to purchase, means parties have agreed to enter into transaction of sale or purchase, which has to be entered subsequently and that transaction of sale or purchase has not yet come into existence. ( 4 ) WHEN the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant is that it was agreement to purchase, it cannot be said that the purchase transaction had itself taken place and so it cannot be said that the ownership of the vehicle stood transferred in favour of the claimant. apart from that this specific plea has nowhere been raised before the tribunal, so also the appellant is not entitled to raise this plea. ( 5 ) THE second plea to avoid the liability taken is that the claimant was a gratuitous passenger. Learned counsel for the appellant very fairly submitted that the claimant was moving with the goods, he was carrying goods on the vehicle and with the goods he was going. This being the position, in my opinion, the claim can very well said to be covered by the full bench decision in the case of national insurance company limited v dundamma. ( 6 ) THUS considered in my opinion, the question of liability so far is concerned, even if it has not been determined by the tribunal, on the facts itself it appears that the insurance company has rightly been held to be liable to pay the compensation. this appeal is devoid of merits. The appeal is dismissed. --- *** --- .