IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 6TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 15TH KARTHIKA 1930 MACA.No. 927 of 2004() ---------------------- OPMV.284/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT(S): -------------- V.K.SHAJI S/O. KUMARAN, VELIKKAKATHU HOUSE, MUNIYARA P.O., KONNATHADY VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) SRI.SUJESH MENON V.B. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SAROJINI, W/O. NARAYANAN, KANJIRATHUNKAL HOUSE, MUMIYARA P.O., KONNATHADY VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK. 2. SARASAMMA D/O. NARAYANAN, DO. DO. DO. 3. NIRMALA D/O. DO. DO. 4. GOPI S/O. DO. DO. 5. SATHI D/O. DO. DO. 6. LATHA D/O. DO. DO. 7. MADHU S/O. DO. DO. 8. TIJI S/O. JOHN, VADAKKEDATHU VEEDU, MUNIYARA P.O., KONNATHADY VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK. 9. THE BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., H.S.A. ROAD, MUNNAR. ADV. SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FOR 9 SRI.MATHEWS JACOB (SR.) FOR R9 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. .................................................................... M.A.C.A. No.927 of 2004 .................................................................... Dated this the 6th day of November, 2008. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard counsel for the appellant and Standing Counsel for the Insurance Company. Appellant's grievance is that after satisfying the claimants of the award amount, the Insurance Company has proceeded against him for recovery in terms of the award. Liability is cast on the registered owner/insured because the Swaraj Mazda, a commercial vehicle involved in the accident was driven by a person who had only a light motor vehicle licence. Appellant's case is that this issue is covered in his favour by decision of the Supreme Court in NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. V. SWARAN SINGH (2004(1) KLT 781(SC)). Moreover, appellant has a further case that he has sold the vehicle to another person and therefore, he has ceased to be liable. The controversy arose because appellant remained exparte before the MACT, even though notice was served on him. Counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that since appellant continues to be the 2 insured, the company can proceed against him only for recovery, no matter whether the vehicle is transferred or not. In support of this contention, counsel has relied on decision of this court in ASHRAF V. FATHIMA (2004(2) KLT 598). Counsel for the appellant, however, referred to several decisions and contended that liability goes along with the transfer and if policy is valid, then the transferee is liable. However, we feel, on receipt of notice the appellant should have impleaded the transferee and got the matter decided by MACT. In any case we feel a fresh adjudication as to whether there is violation of policy condition for want of proper licence for the driver is to be done in the light of decisions above and after verifying the type of vehicle involved in the accident which will be revealed from the RC book. We, therefore, allow the appeal and remand the matter by setting aside that part of the award authorising recovery against the insured on condition of payment of Rs.3,000/- towards cost to the Insurance Company. The appellant will give a Demand Draft for Rs.3,000/- to the Insurance Company, obtain a receipt and along with the receipt, he will produce copy of this judgment before the MACT for him to 3 implead the transferee and for issuing notice to the Insurance Company and for deciding the matter afresh by MACT. We make it clear that in the remand proceedings, the claimants need not be involved and the dispute to be settled is only among the appellant, insurer and the transferee. All issues among the above three are left open for decision by the Tribunal. The appellant is granted two weeks time from date of receipt of copy of this judgment to make payment and if payment is not made within that time, appeal will stand dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge HARUN-UL-RASHID Judge pms