IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 4TH JULY 2008 / 13TH ASHADHA 1930 MACA.No. 1628 of 2004(B) ------------------------------------ OPMV.852/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT : ---------------------------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., METRO PALACE, OPP: NORTH RAILWAY STATION, ERNAKULAM, REP. BY ITS MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.VPK.PANICKER RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 AND CLAIMANT : ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. ANTO, S/O.THOMMAN, VADAKECHIRA, KALIYAR KARA, VANNAPPURAM VILLGE. 2. T.T.JOY, THOTTAKKARA HOUSE, THALAPPALAM, BHARANANGANAM P.O., PALA. 3. GEORGE @ VAKKACHAN, S/O.JOSEPH, MATHAMKUNNEL HOUSE, KALIYAR P.O., VANNAPPURAM VILLAGE, MULLANKANJI KARA. BY ADV. SRI.SHAJI THOMAS PORKKATTIL - R2 SRI.BINU PAUL - R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MACA.No. 1628 of 2004(B) ORDER IN I.A.NO.3581/2005 IN MACA.No. 1628/2004 DISMISSED. 04.07.2008 SD/-, M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE -TRUE COPY- P.A. TO JUDGE pac M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1628 OF 2004 --------------------- Dated this the 4th day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Thodupuzha, in OP(MV) 852/01. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs.77,180/- with a liability to the 3rd respondent in the claim petition to pay the amount. 2. The 3rd respondent/ Insurance Company had raised a contention that going by the records and the first information statement given, the claimant himself seems to be the owner of the vehicle and therefore the Insurance Company cannot be made liable to pay the amount. The registered owner of the vehicle is the 2nd respondent in the claim petition. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent had made available before me for perusal a document issued by the registering authority which would indicate that he had transferred the vehicle in the name of Sri. Mathew with effect from 6.4.92. The accident had taken place on 10.4.00. Therefore on the date of the MACA No.1628/04 2 accident, even going by the records, the 2nd respondent in the claim petition is the owner. The question as to who is the owner of the vehicle now looms large for consideration. Only after deciding the question regarding the ownership, the further question of indemnifying the owner arises for consideration. In that process the first information statement wherein there is an admission regarding the ownership by the claimant which also has to be taken into consideration. But without the proper owner on record, it may not be proper for the court to decide the question of liability of the Insurance Company. Therefore, the award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for consideration regarding all these points. For the said purpose ,parties are directed to adduce evidence and produce documents in support of their respective contentions and the matter shall be decided by the Tribunal in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 11.8.08. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps MACA No.1628/04 3