IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2009 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1931 MACA.No. 1106 of 2004() ----------------------- OPMV.1153/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, NEYYATTINKARA .................... APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT: --------------------------------------- JOHNSY MOSES, S/O. M.GODWIN, ROOBA ILLAM, 23-IA, AZARIPALLAM ROAD, NASAMONY NAGAR, NAGARCOIL-1. BY ADV. SMT.T.D.RAJALAKSHMI SRI.E.R.VENKATESWARAN RESPONDENT(S): APPLICANT AND RESPONDENTS 2 & 3: ----------------------------------------------- 1. SASIDHARAN, S/O. GOVINDAN, THEKUMKARA VEEDU, THALAYALKONAM, MUKUMPALAMOODU, PALLICHAL. 2. NAGARAJAN, KURUTHANCODE VEEDU, MONDAY MARKET VILLAGE, KALKULAM TALUK, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT. 3. THE MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. ANGUVILAS BUILDING, NORTH CAR STREET, NAGARCOIL. ADV. SRI.E.M.JOSEPH FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. -------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1106 OF 2004 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of May, 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair,J. Heard counsel appearing for the appellant and standing counsel appearing for the insurance company. Appeal is filed against the order of the Tribunal authorising recovery from the appellant who was the registered owner of the truck involved in the accident. The grounds on which recovery is ordered against the appellant are violation of policy condition such as want of driving licence for the driver and driver driving the vehicle under the influence of alcohol. Even though appellant's counsel produced a photocopy of the driving licence, which is said to be that of the driver who drove the vehicle, neither the original is available nor even a copy is produced before the Tribunal. Even though opportunity could be given to prove the genuineness of the driving licence, we do not think favourable findings can save him because driver was found at the time of the accident to be driving under the influence of alcohol. Since driver's drunken condition is certified 2 by the doctor through Ext.B4, we do not find any ground to interfere with the award of the MACT. Appeal is consequently dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (C. K. ABDUL REHIM) Judge. kk 3