IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2008 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1930 MACA.No. 56 of 2005() --------------------- OPMV.961/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD .................... APPELLANTS/ RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 ---------------------------------- 1. C.KRISHNAN, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.CHATHU, THEKKUMURI HOUSE, PUTHIYANKAM P.O., ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT (DRIVER, D.L.139/84.P). 2. M.V.MADHAVAN, AGED 71 YEARS, S/O.VELANKANDAN, PANTHALAMKODE KALAM HOUSE, PULLODE P.O., ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. (OWENR). BY ADV. SRI.JOHN JOSEPH(ROY) RESPONDENTS: 3RD RESPONDENT --------------------------- ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., SOBHA COMPLEX, 2ND FLOOR, V.H. ROAD, PALAKKAD-678 001, K.L.9/A 673.(INSURER OF TRACTOR) (POLICY NO.2639/98) BY ADV. SRI.VPK.PANICKER - R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 56 OF 2005 --------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Palakkad, in OP(MV) 961/98. Now the dispute is between the driver/owner on one side and the Insurance Company on the other side. 2. They are aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal that the Insurance Company is given power to recover the amount from them after discharging the liability under the award. The exoneration was claimed by the Insurance Company on account of the absence of a valid driving licence to ply the vehicle. It was a tractor. It is submitted that it was a light motor vehicle. The factum whether it is a light motor vehicle or whether it comes withihin the ambit of light motor vehicle are all matter which have to be proved by facts. It has also to be stated whether it is a commercial vehicle and whether any other licence is required. Equally is important the dictum laid down in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Singh [2004 (1) KLT 781 (SC) as well as in National Insurance Co. Ltd v. Kusum Rai [2006 (2) KLT 300 (SC)]. In Kusum Rai's case the Apex court has held MACA No.56/05 2 that the driver who drove the vehicle and who did not have a valid driving licence would have been permitted to drive the vehicle consciously by the owner the insurer is entitled to succeed in its defence and avoid liability . The Apex court also held that the cause of accident also is a factor where the non availability of a licence or an improper licence is laid fundamental to that proposition. So these are all matters which have to be pleaded and proved by the parties. 3. I do not want to say anything at this stage regarding the same except stating the principles to be applied in the matter. Therefore, the award under challenge is partly set aside to the extent of deciding the liability between the Insurance Company, the owner and the driver. For that purpose parties are permitted to produce documentary evidence as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and the Tribunal thereafter shall decide the matter in accordance with law and also taking into consideration the latest possible decisions available at that time. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 15.7.08. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps MACA No.56/05 3