IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 21ST AUGUST 2008 / 30TH SRAVANA 1930 MACA.No. 1250 of 2007() ----------------------- OPMV.53/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KASARAGOD .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------ NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REP. BY ITS MANAGER, KOCHI RAGIONAL OFFICE, T.P. CELL, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 RESPECTIVELY: ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. MADHAVA, S/O. KRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT NEEROLBE HOUSE, DURGIPALLA, KADAMBAR POST AND VILLAGE, MANJESHWAR, KASARAGOD. 2. MUNEER, S/O. ABDULLA BEARY, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, RESIDING AT EDIYA HOUSE, KADAMBAR POST AND VILLAGE, MANJESHWAR, KASARGOD. 3. ASHISH, S/O. SHIVARAMA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, HYGATHI HITHLU HOUSE, H.NO.VI-106, NEAR RAILWAY GATE, UPPALA, KASARAGOD TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.SATHEESH R.NAIR FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MACA No. 1250/07 2 ORDER ON IA No. 1437/07 IN MACA No.1250/07 DISMISSED 21.8.08 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE. M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1250 OF 2007 --------------------- Dated this the 21st day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kasaragod, in OP(MV) 53/03. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs.22,900/- with 9% interest. The Insurance Company was directed to pay the amount. Aggrieved by that decision, the Insurance Company has come up in appeal. 2. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company contended that the vehicle involved in the accident was an autorickshaw, which is a transport vehicle and that there was no authorisation to drive a transport vehicle that is in the form of a valid badge and therefore, the Insurance Company is entitled to get the right to reimbursement. Suppose a person is driving the vehicle without a proper licence, the owner may be bound to reimburse the amount. Admittedly the vehicle involved is an autorickshaw which is used as a vehicle to carry passengers. This question precisely came up for consideration before the Apex court in the decision reported in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Roshanben Rahemansha Fakir and Another [2008 (3) T.A.C. 20 (SC)]. It was held in that case after considering Sec.147, 3 and 10 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules and MACA No. 1250/07 2 Rule 51 that when a person is to drive a commercial vehicle he must hold an effective licence for the same in terms of Sec.10 of the Act. Definition of light motor vehicle would not include a light transport vehicle and therefore it was held in that case that being a light transport vehicle there is no proper authorisation to drive the light transport vehicle. It has to be held that the driver was riding the vehicle without proper licence. The Apex court also considered the various provisions and forms and held that in such cases there is no effective driving licence as contemplated under the Act. Therefore it has to be held that the vehicle is driven without a valid authorisation to drive transport vehicle and therefore there is a breach of policy conditions. But the claimant being a third party, is entitled to claim the amount from the Insurance Company but the owner of the vehicle is bound to reimburse the amount to the Insurance Company. In this case, the 2nd respondent is impleaded as the owner of the vehicle. Therefore, he is bound to reimburse the amount. The award passed by the Tribunal is modified and the Insurance Company is given a right of recovery of the amount from the 2nd respondent after satisfying the award in favour of the claimant. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps MACA No. 1250/07 3