IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2009 / 22ND ASWINA 1931 MACA.No. 614 of 2009() --------------------------- OPMV.272/2005 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA ....................... APPELLANT(S): 3RD RESPONDENT -------------------------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, ADIMALI, NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, SHARANYA, HOPSTIAL ROAD, KOCHI-11. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. SAJI PAULOSE, S/O. PAILY, CHOORONOLIL HOUSE, PERUMBANKUTHUKARA, MANKULAM.P.O. 2. M.E. BABY, S/O. ETHAPPIRY, MUKKUVANATTU HOUSE, MACHIPLAVU.P.O, IDUKKI - 685 561. 3. BIBIN PAUL, S/O. BABY, MUKKUVANATTU HOUSE, PERUMBANKUTHUKARA, MANKULAM VILLAGE, MACHIPLAVU.P.O, IDUKKI DISTRICT. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/10/2009, ALONG WITH MACA NO.617 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J ------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. NO. 614 OF 2009 & M.A.C.A. NO.617 OF 2009 ------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2009 JUDGMENT These appeals are preferred against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha in O.P(M.V) No.309/2005. The claimants were awarded compensation and the Insurance Company was liable to pay the amount for the reason that it did not substantiate its contention by producing the copy of the policy. The case of the Insurance Company is that the claimants were passengers in a private vehicle, which was covered by an 'Act only' policy and therefore in the light of the dictum laid down in United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Tilak Sing & Others (2006) 4 SCC 404. Insurance Company cannot be saddled with the liability. 2. The learned counsel for the Insurance company has made available before me, a copy of the petition which was filed to receive additional written statement and a copy of the policy that had been appended to the same. The said I.A is numbered M.A.C.A.NO.614/2009 & 617/2009 2 as 3877/2008. When the petition to receive an additional written statement with a copy of the policy is received, the Tribunal was not justified in rejecting the claim of the Insurance Company on the ground that policy is not produced. As usual, the owner and driver did not appear before the Tribunal and therefore nobody was able to help the Tribunal to find out the fact. In the light of the fact that a policy is already in the bundle, it is become necessary for the Court now to give an opportunity to the Insurance Company and for the owner and driver before me to pursue their contentions to decide the liability of the Insurance company. 3.Therefore MACAs are partly allowed, without disturbing the quantum of compensation awarded, but to decide the liability between the insurance company and the owner as well as the entitlement of the claimants to receive compensation from which respondent. Since notice to the claimants is dispensed by this Court, the Insurance Company on appearance before the Tribunal shall take out notice to the claimants as well and the Tribunal M.A.C.A.NO.614/2009 & 617/2009 3 shall permit the owner and driver to file written statements. It shall also permit all the parties to produce both documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 26.11.2009. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE ss