IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2011 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1932 MACA.No. 1673 of 2010() ----------------------- ( O.P.(MV)NO.51/2004 OF MACT,PALAKKAD) APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2 -------------- 1. K.SREENIVASAN, S/O.K.V.K.UDAYAR, 17/770, VASANTH VEEDU, DURGA NAGAR, PALAKKAD. 2. SIVADAS, S/O.RAMAKRISHNA UDAYAR, SREEKRISHNA NIVAS, KADAMKODE, KARINGARAPULLY P.O., PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.LIJU. M.P RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANT & RESPONDENT NO.3 --------------- 1. MANOJKUMAR, (THE MINOR & REP. BY HIS FATHER, NOW HE IS MAJOR), S/O.KRIPANIDHI, 13/225, CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD. 2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, SURYA COMPLEX, 2ND FLOOR, PALAKKAD. ADV. SRI.SIBY MATHEW FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.No.1673 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. Appellants are stated to be the owner and driver respectively of a motor car bearing Reg.No.KRG-1065. The said vehicle was involved in a road traffic accident that occurred on March 1, 2003. Respondent No.1 herein sustained certain injuries in the said accident. In the claim petition filed by respondent No.1, the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal found that appellant No.2 did not possess a valid driving licence at the time of the accident and therefore the appellants were held liable to pay a sum of Rs. 1,07,117/- as compensation with 7.5% interest. However, it was directed that the Insurance Company (respondent No.2 herein), shall pay the compensation with liberty to realise the same from the appellants. The latter part of the award is impugned in this appeal by the appellants contending that as on the day of the accident, appellant No.2 did in fact possess a valid driving licence as could be seen from Annexure A photocopies of the said licence. MACA.No.1673/2010 2 2. Admittedly, appellants did not contest the case before the Tribunal. The Insurance Company which contested the case admitted policy coverage of the vehicle. However, it was contended that to the knowledge of the company, appellant No.2, the driver of the vehicle did not possess a valid driving licence. It was in the above circumstances that the Tribunal held the appellants liable to pay the compensation. 3. We are informed that the Insurance Company has already deposited the amount awarded by the Tribunal. Having perused the entire materials available on record, particularly Annexure A photocopies of the licence, we are of the view that the appellants can be granted an opportunity to contest the case; but on terms. Appellants shall pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as cost to respondent No.2/Insurance Company. The cost shall be deposited before the Tribunal within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On failure of such deposit, the appeal shall stand dismissed. It will be open to the appellants and respondent No.2 to adduce further evidence in the case, if so advised. The Tribunal shall dispose of the MACA.No.1673/2010 3 matter as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within three months from the date of appearance of parties. It is made clear that the Tribunal shall consider only the question of liability. The appellants and respondent No.2 shall appear before the Tribunal on May 17, 2011. All coercive steps for recovery initiated against the appellants at the instance of respondent No.2/Insurance Company shall be kept in abeyance for the time being. Sd/- A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE Sd/- P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. True copy P.A. to Judge