IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 12TH OCTOBER 2009 / 20TH ASWINA 1931 MACA.No. 1939 of 2009(D) ------------------------------ OPMV.789/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): /3RD ADDL.RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------- ROYCHAN.K.M. KUNNUMPURATHU HOUSE, PULICKATHOTTY, VANNAPPURAM. BY ADV. SMT.LEELAMMA GEORGE ABRAHAM SRI.PRATAP ABRAHAM VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): APPELLANT/1ST 2ND 3RD RESPONDENT -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SUNEESH,S/O.PRABAKARAN, KULATHINKAL HOUSE,EDAPILLYKARA, MUTTOM VILLAGE. 2. SHAJAN,PULIKKOTTIYIL HOUSE, MUTTOM KARA, MUTTOM VILLAGE. 3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REP.BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, PRAKASH BUILDING THODUPUZHA THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 1939 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 12th day of October, 2009. J U D G M E N T After going through the award and hearing the learned counsel for the appellant I feel that the court below has omitted to frame a very important issue regarding non joinder of parties. Admittedly the appellant is a registered owner of the vehicle and the policy stands in his name. According to him he had transferred the vehicle to one Nazar by virtue of an agreement, Ext.B2 and it is seen that as per the police records the vehicle has been taken delivery of by one Satheesh under the provisions of the M.V.Act. Especially in the light of S.2(30) of the M.V.Act a person who is in possession of the property can also be the owner. It has been held in so many decisions that passing of consideration and handing over of possession is sufficient to hold the divestiture of title and therefore ownership can be affixed on a person even if there is no change in the registration certificate. These are all matters where one has to analyze M.A.C.A. 1939 OF 2009 -:2:- after making necessary parties as parties before Court especially in this case when the claimant is a pillion rider and the insurance company has been exonerated from the liability and so the question looms large on the owner of the vehicle. Therefore I set aside the award passed by the Tribunal directing the Tribunal to frame appropriate issue on non joinder of necessary parties, permit the claimant to take steps and then decide the matter afresh after affording sufficient opportunity to all concerned to produce both documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions. The appellant is directed to appear before the trial court on 25.11.2009 and take out notice to other parties for their appearance before the Tribunal. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-