IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DECEMBER 2009 / 2ND POUSHA 1931 MACA.No. 718 of 2009() ---------------------- OPMV.1468/2005 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPALAM .................... APPELLANT(S): -------------- NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, DIVISION NO.10,FLAT NO.101/106, N1,BMC HOUSE, CONNAUGHT PLACE,NEW DELHI-110001.REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,KOCHI REGIONAL OFFICE, OMANA BUILDINGS,JEWS STREET, PADMA JUNCTION, KOCHI-682035. BY ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. ABOOBAKKAR,AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.KUNJUMUHAMMED, ERATTUVAKKATHU HOUSE, V.K.KADAVU, THRITHALA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. A.SIDIQ(AGED NOT KNOWN),S/O.HAMZA, ARAPURATHODI HOUSE,P.O.KALADIPATTA, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. UMMERKUTTY.M,(AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN)MOOTHARTHODI HOUSE, MARUTHUR.PO, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.R.SREEHARI ADV.SMT. T.D. RAJALAKSHMI FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.718 OF 2009 ............................................. Dated this the 23rd day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Ottapalam in OP(MV)No.1468/2005. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal has awarded him a compensation of Rs.39,300/= and directed the insurance company to pay the amount. It is against that decision, the insurance company has come up in appeal. The Tribunal found that absence of a badge is not a ground to exonerate the insurance company from the liability relying upon the decision of this Court. The matter has been considered by the Apex Court in very many decisions and it has been held that when there is violation of Sections 10 and 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act, there is a breach of policy conditions and so the insurance company is entitled to raise the contentions and further at least it has the right to get reimbursed. Under Section 10 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the word used is transport vehicle. Any commercial vehicle or a passenger carrying vehicle will come within the ambit of : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.718 OF 2009 the definition of transport vehicle under Section 2(47) of the Motor Vehicles Act. When it is so, under Section 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act a person who is driving the said vehicle must have an endorsement to the effect that he is entitled to drive such type of vehicles. So,badge is a necessary endorsement given by the road transport authorities to drive a particular vehicle which was being used by the driver. Admittedly, the driver did not have such an authorised licence to drive a transport vehicle. So, it has to be held that he was not duly licensed. When he is not duly licensed, it amounts to breach of the policy conditions. As held in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Singh [(2004 (1) KLT 781 (SC) since a third party need not be deprived of the compensation for the laches on the part of the owner, it is desirable that the insurance company pays the amount awarded and get it reimbursed from the owner. 2. Therefore the MACA is partly allowed and the finding of the Tribunal making the insurance company totally liable is set aside. The insurance company is directed to pay the amount to the third partly namely the claimant and thereafter : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.718 OF 2009 recover the said amount on satisfaction of the award from the owner of the vehicle. The owner is also given three months’ time for making payment and only thereafter the insurance company need initiate recovery proceedings as contemplated under law. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 4 : M.A.C.A.No.718 OF 2009