IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2010 / 1ST MAGHA 1931 MACA.No. 2318 of 2007() ----------------------- OPMV.724/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: --------------------------------------- ANDROOS, S/O MATHAI, AGED 36 YEARS, CHERIYABANATTU HOUSE, AIROORKARA, KOTTAPADY VILLAGE. BY ADV. MR.N.P.SETHU RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------------------------- 1. K.V.ISMAIL, KANJIRAKODAN, KOTTAPADY P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM. 2. JOSEPH, S/O ABRAHAM, RESIDING AT KANNUMKUZHI HOUSE, PAMBOORIPPARA BHAGAM, KOTTAPADY VILLAGE. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, KOTHAMANGALAM. 4. A.A.REJI, AZHAKANAKUNNEL HOUSE, PLAMOODY P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM. R3 BY ADV. MR.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 2318 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 21th day of January, 2010. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha in O.P.(MV)724/03. Really it is shocking to my conscience regarding the approach made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. Two cases were tried jointly as O.P.(MV)Nos.723/03 and 724/03 which had arisen out of the same accident. Respondent No. 1 in both the cases are one K.V.Ismail. The Tribunal considered O.P.(MV)723/03 and ordered the insurance company to pay the amount. But exonerated the insurance company of the same vehicle, on the ground that the claimant had not taken steps to serve notice on the owner. Technically the Tribunal may be right for the reason that it is only the vicarious liability of the owner that is being indemnified by the insurance company. But one has to bear in mind that the welfare legislation like M.V.Act which deals with provisions for compensation to accidental victims should not be thrown M.A.C.A. 2318 OF 2007 -:2:- away on technical grounds. When in the very same accident which had been tried by the very same Tribunal that too jointly, should not have adopted an approach exonerating the insurance company on the ground that the claimant did not take out notice to the first respondent properly. Therefore I am inclined to grant an opportunity. Therefore I set aside the award passed by the Tribunal in O.P.(MV) 724/03 and direct the appellant to take out notice to the first respondent namely K.V.Ismail and thereafter the Tribunal shall dispose of the matter in accordance with law. It is also further directed that the parties be permitted to produce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 25.2.2010. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-