IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 26TH JUNE 2008 / 5TH ASHADHA 1930 MACA.No. 222 of 2003() ---------------------- OPMV.36/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THODUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/2ND RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------ HAJI M.KUSARUDIN, BARI MANZIL HOUSE, MELEGUDALOOR, VANDIPERIYAR. BY ADV. SRI.VIJU ABRAHAM SRI.JOY C. PAUL RESPONDENTS: PETITIONERS 1 TO 4 AND RESPONDENTS 1 & 3: ------------------------------------------------------ * 1. CHURULI, S/O. THOTHAN, HOUSE NO.32, KANNISERVARAMPETTY BHAGAM, CHINNAMANNOOR VILLAGE AND P.O., THENI DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU STATE. * 2. T.CINIYAMAL, W/O. THOTHAN, DOOR NO.31, KANNISERVAIPETTY, UTHAMAPALAYAM TALUK, THENI, TAMIL NADU STATE. * 3. CHELLAMMAL, D/O. THOTHAN, -DO- -DO- -DO-. * 4. A.AYYAMMAL, D/O. THOTHAN, -DO- -DO- -DO-. [RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 ARE DELETED AS PER ORDER DATED 28.10.2003 I.A. NO.1397 OF 2003 5. SUNNY, W/O. PAPPACHAN, KANATHU HOUSE, VALLAKKADAVU KARA, MANJUMALA VILLAGE. 6. THE BRANCH MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., KANJIKUZHY, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB (SR.) FOR R6 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: -2- MACA.No. 222 of 2003 ORDER ON I.A. NO.1237 OF 2004 IN M.A.C.A. NO.222 OF 2003 DISMISSED. 26.6.2008 (SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE) /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 222 OF 2003 --------------------- Dated this the 26th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the 2nd respondent in the claim petition who is the owner, against the finding of the Tribunal directing him to reimburse the amount to the Insurance Company on account of the fact that the driver did not have a valid driving licence at the relevant time of accident. This owner was keeping silent and did not appear before the Tribunal. But in ground C of the memorandum of appeal particulars regarding licence is given. 2. Learned counsel in fairness has also shown me a photocopy of the driving licence, which is an indicative of the fact that there has been a valid driving licence. But being a photocopy and as the matter requires admissibility in evidence, it is desirable that the fining with respect to the reimbursement is set aside and the matter is remanded back for fresh consideration. Therefore, the MACA is partly allowed and the award so far as it relates to the reimbursement by the owner is concerned, is set aside and the claimant is given an opportunity to file a written MACA No.222/03 2 statement. He is also permitted to produce documents and adduce evidence in support of the contention that the driver was having a valid driving license at the time of the accident. The Insurance Company is also permitted to file additional pleadings or documents, if it chooses to do so. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 5.8.08. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps MACA No.222/03 3 MACA No.222/03 4 MACA No.222/03 5