IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 16TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 25TH KARTHIKA 1931 MACA.No. 1509 of 2009(C) ----------------------- OPMV.175/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD .................... APPELLANT(S): 3RD RESPONDENT ---------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., CHENNAI, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM NORTH, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT ----------------------- 1. BABY, S/O.VELAN, PULLADIKALAM, MANHAPARA P.O., ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. VARMAN CARRYING COMPANY, NO.3 BAJANAI KOVIL STREET, ANNA NAGAR, CHENNAI. 3. ANPARASAN, S/O.SAVIER, DOOR NO.7/1. SOWRIYARKOVIL STREET, PAPANASAMPASUPATHI KOVIL VILLAGE, PAPANASAM TALUK, TANCHAVOOR DISTRICT, TAMILNADU. ADV. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN FOR R1 SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH FOR R1 SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR FOR R1 SMT.VANDANA MENON FOR R1 SMT.ANJU P.NAIR FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/11/2009, ALONG WITH MACA 1510/09 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NOs. 1509 and 1510 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 16th day of November, 2009. J U D G M E N T Both these appeals are preferred by the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. who is the 3rd respondent in O.P. (MV)Nos.175/02 and 177/02 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Palakkad. The insurance company has challenged the finding on the ground that the cheque issued towards the payment of premium was dishonoured and there has been proper intimation to the owner as well as the RTO thereby entitling the insurance company to get exonerated from the liability. The Tribunal considered this point and held that though documents are produced for the issuance of the cheque, the dishonour of the cheque, nothing was produced before the Tribunal to show that it has been intimated to the owner as well the Road Transport Authorities. The learned Tribunal had referred to the decision of the Apex Court in Deddappa v. National Insurance Company Ltd. 2008 (1) KLT 296(SC). In that case the Hon'ble Apex Court held suppose M.A.C.A. Nos.1509 & 1510/09 -:2:- a policy is issued and the cheque is dishonoured before the cancellation of the policy then if the insurance company had intimated the owner and the concerned authority then it will get exonerated from the liability. 2. Here the witness of the insurance company as RW1 would depose that notice has been issued by registered post. Except the mere ipsi dexit of the Manger no acceptable evidence is forthcoming and therefore the Tribunal was not inclined to accept it which could have been proved by documents by the insurance company. Learned counsel for the insurance company in fairness submits that there would be documents and if an opportunity is given he can establish it before the Court. I feel an opportunity can be given to all concerned to consider the issue by producing necessary documents. Therefore the awards under challenge are set aside so far as it relates to the liability of the insurance company, the right of the claimant to get it from the insurance company and the interse dispute between the insurance company and the owner. Parties are also M.A.C.A. Nos.1509 & 1510/09 -:3:- permitted to produce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then the Tribunal is directed to dispose of the matter in accordance with law. The insurance company after appearing before the Tribunal shall take out notice to the persons whose junction is peremptory for the proper disposal of the matter. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 16.12.2009. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-