IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2008 / 7TH SRAVANA 1930 M.A.C.A.No. 1289 of 2006(B) ----------------------- O.P(MV) NO.200/2002 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TIRUR .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT: -------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD., TIRUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM NORTH, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2: ------------------------------ * 1. HASKAR, S/O.MOHAMMED, CHENGANAKATTIL HOUSE, P.O.KLARI.(DELETED) 2. K.ALAVI, S/O.KUNHI MOIDEEN, P.O.OMACHAPUZHA. (* THE IST RESPONDENT IS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AT THE RISK OF THE PETITIONER AS PER ORDER DATED 12/04/2007 IN I.A. NO.775/07) THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: scm M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1289 OF 2006 --------------------- Dated this the 29th day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tirur, in OP(MV) 200/02. It is the case of the claimant that she had sustained injuries in a road accident on account of the collision between two vehicles. The Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the auto driver as well as the motor cyclist and held them equally liable. 2. It is the insurer of the auto who has come up in appeal with the contention that though a specific pleading was raised that the auto driver did not have a valid driving licence, the Tribunal has not considered the same and therefore the Tribunal has failed to order recovery of the amount from the owner of the auto. As far as claimant is concerned, the amount has to be paid and the only question is the right to recovery. Along with the appeal, the Insurance Company has produced a photo copy of the licence and also a copy of the policy. I receive those documents under Order Order XLI Rule 27. A perusal of the driving licence would reveal that the driver of the auto had a valid licence to drive motor vehicles other than transport vehicles from 9.3.2001 to 8.3.2021. The accident took place in the year 2002. But the question remains that the auto being a transport MACA No.1289/06 2 vehicle whether there was a valid licence for him to drive that vehicle. Though it has been pleaded, it has not been considered. Since the owner of the vehicle, in spite of notice, had chosen to remain ex parte and as any finding would affect him it is desirable that the said question is determined by the Tribunal after giving notice to the owner from the Tribunal as well. Therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is set aside to the limited extent of finding whether the driver of the auto had a valid licence and whether there was a breach of policy conditions which would entitle the Insurance Company to get reimbursement from the owner of the vehicle. For these purposes, the Registry is directed to forward the documents produced along with the appeal. The Tribunal can permit the Insurance Company to adduce evidence in support of its contentions. Insurance Company shall also take notice to the owner from the Tribunal so that he can also be heard and an opportunity can be given to him. Insurance Company is directed to appear before the Tribunal on 3.9.08. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps MACA No.1289/06 3