IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 19TH BHADRA 1931 MACA.No. 468 of 2009() ----------------------------------- OP.(MV) 382/1997 OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TIRUR. .......... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS 1 & 2: ------------------------ 1. VANIYEMPEEDIKAKKAL ABDUL LATHEEF @ KUNHUTTY, S/O.MOIDEEN, POST MANGALAM, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. T.K.SAINUDHEEN, S/O.BAPPUTTY, THAIKOODATHIL HOUSE, POST MANGALAM, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER & 3RD RESPONDENT: ----------------------------- 1. AYDRESS MASTER, S/O.ALAVI HAJI, PARAMBADAN HOUSE, THOZHANOOR, RANDATHANI, TIRUR TALUK. 2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, C.K.H.BUILDING, THAZHEPPALAM, TIRUR. R2 BY ADVS. MR.A.R.GEORGE MR.SHAJI S. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss ORDER ON IA. NO.2199/2009 IN MACA. NO.468/2009 DISMISSED 10/09/2009 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 468 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 10th day of September, 2009. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred by the owner and driver in O.P. (MV) 382/97 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Tirur. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.27,000/- to the claimant and there was a right granted to the insurance company to get it reimbursed from respondents 1 and 2 who are the appellants herein. The order of reimbursement was granted on the basis that there was no evidence to show there was an effective driving licence on the date of the accident namely 13.12.95. Now along with the appeal photocopy of the licence and particulars from the Road Transport Authority are seen produced. The original of the licence is not produced but the endorsement appears to be that there has been a renewal of the licence in the month of May or July 1995 which extend upto 18.4.98. Learned counsel for the insurance company had raised another contention that the vehicle involved is a commercial vehicle M.A.C.A. 468 OF 2009 -:2:- and therefore a badge is required. First of all it has to be found out whether there was an effective, valid driving licence as on the date of the accident and secondly whether such a licence is sufficient to drive the vehicle in order to cast the liability on the insurance company in the light of the decision laid down by the Apex Court has to be considered. Therefore the matter requires reconsideration on that point alone. Therefore the appeal is allowed and the award so far as it relates to the interse liability between the insurance company and the owner and the driver is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for consideration of the points whether there was an effective, valid driving licence on the date of accident and whether that licence was sufficient to cast the liability on the insurance company to indemnify the owner of the vehicle. For the said purpose both the parties are permitted to produce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and the Tribunal is directed to dispose of the matter in accordance with law. The junction of the claimant M.A.C.A. 468 OF 2009 -:3:- is not necessary for the disposal of the case. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 6.11.2009. If the appellants succeed ultimately then provisions have to be made in the award for reimbursement of the amount by the insurance company to them. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-