IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 23RD FEBRUARY 2010 / 4TH PHALGUNA 1931 MACA.No. 2757 of 2009() ----------------------- APPELLANT/IST RESPONDENT :- --------------------------------------------- ARUNKUMAR, S/O.KUMARAN, KANNAMKULANGARA HOUSE, P.O.POOVANCHIRA, THRISSUR. BY ADV. MR.K.I.SAGEER IBRAHIM RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. JOSE KUZHUPPIL, AGED 50, S/O.THOMAS, KUZHUPPIL HOUSE, PEECHI P.O., THRISSUR-680 653. 2. JOJI THOMAS, S/O.THOMAS, NEDUNGOTTIL HOUSE, PATTILAMKUZHI, PEECHI, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, CITY HEIGHTS BUILDINGS, SOUTH JUNCTION, CHALAKKUDY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. R2 BY ADV. MR.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) R3 BY ADV.MR.RAJESH THOMAS THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/04/2010, ALONG WITH WP(C) No.11446 OF 2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JVT M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A.NO. 2757 OF 2009 & W.P.(C).NO.11446 of 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 7th day of April, 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = J U D G M E N T This motor accident claims appeal has been preferred against the award of the M.A.C.T., Thrissur in O.P.(MV) No.1295/2002, whereby the tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.35,950/- with 7% interest per annum from 12.6.2002. The tribunal found that, the driver did not have a valid driving licence and therefore held that, there was breach of policy conditions and so ordered reimbursement of the amount by the owner to the insurance company. 2. The learned counsel had invited my attention to the ground 'C' in the memorandum of appeal regarding the quantum of compensation. A perusal of the award would reveal that, the claimant had a fracture of the left maxillary bone, fracture of the left mandible and other injuries in the zygomatic region. He was treated as impatient in the Heart M.A.C.A.NO. 2757 OF 2009 & W.P.(C).NO.11446 of 2010 2 Heart Hospital, Thrissur. Taking into consideration the method of treatment, the nature of ailment and the accident and the suffering undergone by the claimant, the tribunal has fixed a reasonable compensation and did not give any compensation for permanent disability. But awarded an amount of Rs.8,000/- as compensation for loss of amenities, which is certain to take place on account of the serious facial injuries and the fracture. Therefore, the amount awarded is not to be interfered. 3. The writ petition (W.P.(C).No.11446 of 2010) is preferred to stay the recovery proceedings commenced on the basis of the order of the tribunal. It was vehemently contended before me, that the owner did not have the knowledge of the proceedings and therefore, he could not participate in the trial. Therefore, this Court called for the entire case records and it is seen that on 28.2.2003, the appellant had signed the notice in the OP(MV) case. Therefore, the contention that there was no notice for him M.A.C.A.NO. 2757 OF 2009 & W.P.(C).NO.11446 of 2010 3 cannot be accepted. But the important question is regarding the liability of reimbursement. Under Section 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act, a person cannot drive a vehicle without proper licence, authorising him to drive a particular type of vehicle. The court below in paragraph-11 has specifically considered this point and found that the police had filed a charge sheet against the rider for driving without a valid licence. There is no material evidence produced in the appeal as well, to show that there was a valid licence for the rider. Riding a vehicle through public road without licence is a serious offence which is to be taken very seriously in the present set up, on account of the large motor accidents that arise in the State every day. As per the policy conditions, when a person drives a vehicle without a valid licence, it amounts to breath of policy conditions as he is not duly licenced. When the policy condition is violated and as the tribunal is found that the accident has taken place on account of the negligence of the rider, it is certain M.A.C.A.NO. 2757 OF 2009 & W.P.(C).NO.11446 of 2010 4 that the principles laid down in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Swaran Singh in 2004 (1) KLT 781 for breach is squarely satisfied. Therefore, the insurance company is entitled to get the reimbursement as ordered by the tribunal. Hence, the appeal lack merits and it is dismissed. 4. The writ petition, in the light of this confirmation of the award of the tribunal is also without substance and therefore, it is dismissed. But I direct the insurance company and the revenue recovery authorities not to initiate any coercive action, for a period of 3 months from today, in order to enable the owner to pay the amount to the insurance company. In the result, both the M.A.C.A and the Writ Petition are dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN JUDGE nl