IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 7TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 18TH MAGHA 1932 MACA.No. 2294 of 2007() ----------------------- OPMV.946/1996 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS - (RESPONDENTS 4 AND 5) ------------------------------------------------ 1. VISWANATHAN PILLAI, MAMBOLIL, SOORANAD, KOLLAM. 2. SADANANDAN PILLAI, RAJESH BHAVAN, MANATHURKULANGARA, ALUMMKADAVU, KARUNAGAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.K.SUBASH CHANDRA BOSE RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER/RES. 1 TO 3 ------------------------------------- 1. RAVIKUTTAN PILLAI P., RAVEESH NILAYAM, MANAPPALLY VADAKK, PAVUMBA. 2. VENUGOPALA PILLAI C., PAZHAVOOR, THEKKATHIL, MANAPPALLY. 3. REGHUNATHAN NAIR, THAZHAVOOR PADEETTATHIL, MANAPPALLY NORTH, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 4. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.JOE KALLIATH FOR R4 SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN FOR R1 SRI.K.JAGADEESH FOR R1 SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. Basheer & P.Q. Barkath Ali, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MACA.No. 2294 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 7th day of February, 2011 Judgment Basheer, J: Appellant No.1 is stated to be the registered owner of a car bearing registration No.KL 2A 5563 which was allegedly involved in a road traffic accident that occurred during 1994, when it dashed against a two wheeler. Respondent No.1 herein who allegedly sustained certain injuries while he was travelling as a pillion on the two wheeler referred to above bearing registration No. KLB 9035 sought compensation from the appellants and respondent No.4 Insurance Company. The case of the claimant was that the vehicle belonging to appellant No.1 and driven by appellant No.2 had caused the accident. 2. The appellants, admittedly, did not contest the case before the Tribunal, since, according to them, they obtained a legal advice that they would be exonerated from any liability as their vehicle was not involved in the accident. Moreover, since the vehicle was insured with M/s. National Insurance Company, the insurer would nevertheless indemnify them even assuming it was MACA.2294/2007. : 2 : ultimately held that the vehicle was involved in such an accident. 3. But respondent No.4 Insurance Company was impleaded before the Tribunal as the insurer of the two wheeler. In other words, the insurer of the car was not impleaded in the case. The Tribunal after considering the materials available before it passed an award in a sum of Rs.87,000/- with 9% interest and directed the appellants to pay the same to the claimant in equal proportion since obviously they had not contested the case. The above award is under challenge in this appeal. 4. The primary contention raised by the appellants is that their vehicle (KL 2A 5563) was never involved in the alleged accident as contended by the claimant. It is further contended by them that their vehicle was validly insured with M/s. National Insurance Company, Kayamkulam branch. But as mentioned earlier, the National Insurance Company, Kayamkulam Branch was not impleaded in the case at all. Incidentally, the Kollam Branch of the same Company was impleaded as the insurer of the two wheeler. 5. Sri.Joe Kalliath, learned counsel for the Insurance Company, has submitted that on verification of MACA.2294/2007. : 3 : the records it has been found that the Kayamkulam Branch of the Company had in fact issued Annexure II policy in respect of the car and at the time of the accident the vehicle was validly covered under the said policy. It is however contended by the learned counsel that any accident involving the said car during 1994 was never reported to the Company. 6. We have carefully perused the impugned award and Annexure I report of the Police and Annexure II photocopy of the policy issued in respect of the car belonging to appellant No.1. 7. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case we are satisfied that the impugned award is liable to be set aside for reasons more than one. We do so. However at this stage we do not propose to refer to or deal with the various contentions raised either by the appellants or the Insurance Company. Suffice it to say that the parties will be at liberty to adduce evidence in the case, either oral or documentary, if they are so advised. 8. The National Insurance Company, Kayamkulam Branch is impleaded in the Claim Petition. The Company shall be entitled to file its written statement and produce all necessary documents. The appellants shall also be entitled MACA.2294/2007. : 4 : to adduce further evidence in the matter. 9. However the appellants shall pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards cost to the Legal Services Committee attached to this Court. Cost shall be paid on or before February 21, 2011. 10. If the appellants fail to pay the cost as directed above, the appeal will stand dismissed. The Tribunal shall dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible, at any rate , on or before June 30, 2011. 11. The statutory deposit of Rs.25,000/- made by the appellant under section 173 shall be subject to the fresh award to be passed by the Tribunal. 12. The parties shall appear before the Tribunal on March 10, 2011. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. A.K. Basheer Judge. P.Q. Barkath Ali Judge. an.