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 10TH AUGUST 2010 / 19TH SRAVANA 1932 MACA.No. 635 of 2010() ---------------------- OPMV.1741/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PERUMBAVOOR .................... APPELLANT(S): 2ND RESPONDENT ---------------------------- A.DEVADAS, S/O. APPU, CHARUVINKAL HOUSE, MANJAPPARA DESOM, KANNAMBARA DESOM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. M/S. AVM CATTLE & POULTRY FEED MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES, 25/327, R.G.STREET,COIMBATORE. 2. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., CITY BRANCH II, UNITED SHOPPING COMPLEX, 94/34, DR. NANJAPPA ROAD 641018. ADV. SRI.K.L.NARASIMHAN FOR R1 SRI.JOE KALLIATH FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/08/2010, ALONG WITH MACA NO.641 OF 2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. Basheer & P.Q. Barkath Ali, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MACA.Nos.635 & 641 of 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 10th day of August, 2010 Judgment Basheer, J: These two appeals are directed against a common award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor. Three Claim Petitions were disposed of by the Tribunal by the common award. The common appellant in these two appeals is the driver of the vehicle involved in the accident. The Tribunal found that the appellant did not possess a valid driving licence and badge at the time of the accident, and therefore held him and the owner of the vehicle liable to pay compensation in the three cases. 2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the finding of the Tribunal is totally erroneous, inasmuch as the appellant did in fact possess a valid driving licence and badge at the time of the accident. The appellant has produced photocopy of the licence and badge before this Court. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for respondent No.2 that the appellant cannot be allowed to raise such a contention at this belated stage especially since he had refused to appear before the Tribunal, though he was served with IMACAs.635 & 641/2010. : 2 : notice. Anyhow we do not propose to refer to or deal with the above aspect any further, especially since it has been brought to our notice that a learned single Judge before whom the connected appeal (MACA.No.643 of 2010) came up for consideration, has already remanded one of the Claim Petitions involved in that appeal to the Tribunal for fresh consideration, apparently for the very same reason referred to by us above. 4. The appeals are allowed. The two claim petitions are remanded to the Tribunal for fresh disposal in accordance with law. However we make it clear that the quantum fixed by the Tribunal shall not be disturbed. A.K. Basheer Judge. P.Q. Barkath Ali Judge. an.