IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 27TH MARCH 2009 / 6TH CHAITHRA 1931 MACA.No. 756 of 2009() ---------------------- OPMV.771/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): 2ND RESPONDENT ---------------------------- MARY JOHN, AGED 84, KANJIRAKATTU HOUSE, THOPPRAMKUDY P.O., VATHIKUDY VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.SOJAN MICHEAL RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 & 3 ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. SAJITH KUAMR @ SAJITH, S/O.SUKUMARAN, AIKKARAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PARAKADAVU BHAGOM, KATTAPANA KARA & VILLAGE. 2. SAJI, S/O.JOSEPH, VAIYAMPLACKAL HOUSE, THOPRAMKUDY KARA, VATHIKUDY VILLAGE. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, REPRESENTED BY ITS DEVISIONAL MANAGER, MUVATTUPUZHA. ADV. SRI.A.R.GEORGE FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON I.A.966/2009 IN M.A.C.A.No.756/2009 27.3.2009 DISMISSED Sd/- M.Sasidharan Nambiar Judge /true copy/ P.S to Judge M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== M.A.C.A NO.756 OF 2009 =========================== Dated this the 27th day of March,2009 JUDGMENT Second respondent in O.P.(M.V)771/2004 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thodupuzha is the appellant. Appellant is the owner of the vehicle involved in the accident. First respondent, the pillion driver filed O.P.771/2004 claiming compensation for the injuries sustained. The rider of the motor cycle filed O.P.722/2003 claiming compensation. Both the claim petitions were heard together and as per common order compensation was awarded. The third respondent Insurance Company was directed to deposit the compensation amount. They were permitted to realise the amount from the appellant. Appeal is filed challenging the award allowing the Insurance Company to realise the amount from M.A.C.A.756 /2009 2 the appellant. 2. Though notices were served on the respondents in the petition to condone the delay, none of them appeared. 3. The only point for consideration in the appeal is whether third respondent Insurance Company is entitled to realise the amount from the appellant. 4. The petitioner in O.P.(M.V) 722/2003 challenged the award before this Court in M.A.C.A.455/2008. The appellant herein was the first respondent. She filed Cross Objection 10/2009 in that case challenging the award enabling Insurance Company to realise it from appellant. As per judgment dated 24.2.2009 the Division Bench set aside the findings of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal that Insurance Company is entitled to realise the amount from the appellant, holding that inspite of the transfer effected by the insured,third respondent is liable to pay the M.A.C.A.756 /2009 3 compensation and is not entitled to realise it from the appellant. In view of the said decision, the appeal can only be allowed holding that third respondent is not entitled to realise the amount from the appellant. Appeal is allowed. The award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal in O.P.(M.V) 771/2004 is modified to, the limited extent of setting aside the provision enabling third respondent to realise the amount deposited in court from the appellant/second respondent. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006