IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2010 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1931 MACA.No. 720 of 2006() ---------------------- OPMV.1013/1997 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT -------------------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, REGIONAL OFFICE, METRO PALACE, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENTS/ PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2: ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. S.NARAYANAN, SHIRDI, MANAYIL KULANGARA, THIRUMULLAVARAM, KOLLAM. 2. D.PARVATHI, 1130 NILAMPATHY, NENMARA, PALGHAT. 3. R.CHANDRAN, PANAMKAVU VEEDU, KOLLAMKODU, CHITTOOR. ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/03/2010, ALONG WITH M.A.C.A No.726 OF 2006 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.C.A.Nos.720, 726, 1036 of 2006 & 1233,1234 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. These five appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment since the issue involved in them is common. More over, the claim petitions, from which these appeals have arisen, are in respect of the same accident which involved a car and a lorry. 2. Admittedly, two vehicles collided with each other and the claimants suffered some injuries. While five claim petitions were filed seeking compensation for the injuries sustained by the victims, the other petition was in respect of the damage caused to the car. It is the admitted position that four claim petitions were filed before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Kollam and two petitions were filed before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Mavelikkara. 3. The Tribunal at Kollam awarded compensation to the victims in the four cases which came before it after holding that the accident occurred because of the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the lorry. Since the Insurance Company admitted policy MACA.NO.720/06 & connected cases Page numbers coverage in respect of the offending vehicle, it was directed that the compensation be paid by the Insurance Company to these victims. It is also on record, out of the four cases which came up before the Tribunal at Kollam, in one case, the compensation awarded was below Rs. 10,000/-. The Insurance Company had unsuccessfully challenged the said award before this court in a writ petition. Therefore, we are not concerned with the said claim petition. 4. M.A.C.A.No.720/2006, 726/2006 and 1036/2006 are at the instance of the Insurance Company challenging the award to the extent that the Tribunal did not give recovery right to the Company from the owner/insured since the driver of the offending vehicle, according to the appellant/Insurance Company, did not possess valid driving licence and badge. 5. In the two claim petitions filed by other two victims before the Tribunal at Mavelikkara, the Tribunal held that the Insurance Company would be entitled to pay and recover the compensation from the owner and driver of the offending lorry since the former did not possess a valid licence and badge at the time of the accident. The said finding is challenged by the owner and driver in M.A.C.A.Nos. MACA.NO.720/06 & connected cases Page numbers 1233/2008 & 1234/2008. The contention of the appellants in these two appeals is that the finding of the Tribunal is ex facie illegal and unsustainable since the driver did in fact possess a valid driving licence and badge. The appellants have produced photocopy ( certified by the Transport authorities) of the licence and badge along with the memorandum of appeal. 6. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that the owner and driver may have to necessarily produce the original licence and badge before the Tribunal to establish the above contention, if it is to be held that the driver was holding a valid licence and badge at the time of the accident. There is considerable force in the above contention especially since the owner and driver had refused to appear before the Tribunal on receipt of notice . 7. However, learned counsel submits that there was no failure on the part of the owner and driver at all. They had produced the driving licence and badge before the Insurance Company immediately after the accident and they were assured that all necessary steps would be taken to defend their case before the Tribunal, if and when cases were filed. Any how, we do not propose to go into that area of MACA.NO.720/06 & connected cases Page numbers controversy at this stage. 8. Having considered the entire materials available on record, we are satisfied that the owner and driver have to be afforded sufficient opportunity to adduce evidence in this regard. However, we hasten to add that the finding that the driver of the lorry was responsible for the accident shall not be re-opened. Similarly, the quantum of compensation awarded to the injured victims shall not also be disturbed. Further, the quantum of compensation awarded for damage to the car is also held to be concluded especially since the Insurance Company did not raise any contention with regard to its liability either to the extent or in any other respect. 9. All these cases are remitted to the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal , Kollam for the sake of convenience of the parties, even though two out of the five claim petitions which are the subject matter of these appeals were heard and disposed of by the Tribunal at Mavelikkara. 10. The driver, owner and insurer shall appear before the Tribunal at Kollam on April 26, 2010. The Registry shall inform the Tribunal at Mavelikkara to forward the records in O.P.(MV) MACA.NO.720/06 & connected cases Page numbers No.185/1997 and 1081/1996 to the Tribunal at Kollam forthwith. 11. The Tribunal at Kollam shall dispose of the five claim petitions as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment after affording sufficient opportunity to the owner, driver and Insurer to adduce further evidence. The question whether the driver of the lorry was or was not holding a valid licence and badge at the time of the accident shall alone be considered. 12. After disposal of the cases, the Tribunal at Kollam shall send back the records in the two claim petitions referred to above to the Tribunal at Mavelikkara to facilitate withdrawal of amounts by the claimants in those two claim petitions. The Appeals are disposed of in the above terms. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MACA.NO.720/06 & connected cases Page numbers