IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2008 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 MACA.No. 1634 of 2008() ---------------------------------- OPMV.1380/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ATTINGAL .................... APPELLANT/(IST RESPONDENT) -------------------------------------------- HABUSA BEEVI, D/O.FATHIMA BEEVI, KARIM MANZIL, NEAR N.E.S BLOCK, MUDAPPURAM, CHIRAYINKEEZHU, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENTS/(PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SURESH BABU, S/O.REGHUNATHA KURUP, 'SANKETAM', ALANTHARA, VENJARAMOODU, NELLANADU VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. 2. NAZEER, S/O. MEERA SAHIB, R.S. NIWAS, NEAR N.E.S BLOCK, MUDAPPURAM, KIZHUVILAM VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. 3. THE MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., ATTINGAL.P.O, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.P.JAYASANKAR FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/12/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ M.N.KRISHNAN, J ===================== MACA No.1634 OF 2008 ===================== Dated this the 17th day of December 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Attingal in O.P.(MV)No.1380 of 1998. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.51,230/- and directed respondents 1 and 2 in the claim petition to pay the amount and exonerated the insurance company from the liability on the ground that the existence of the policy was not proved. Aggrieved by that decision the appeal has been preferred. Learned counsel for the appellant had produced before me as Annexure C , a copy of the petition in another case, O.P.(MV)No.105 of 1997 of the same Tribunal, where the very same vehicle got involved in the accident. There also the first respondent is the present appellant. In the cause title itself, the name of the insurance company with policy number and validity period has been given and the validity period is shown as 14.6.1996 to 8.4.1997. It is also seen from Annexure D order that the same matter was compromised between the insurance company and the claimant therein admitting the existence of the policy and Rs.12,000/- has been awarded as compensation. MACA 1634/2008 -:2:- The date of accident in the present case is 18.3.1997. Suppose the valid period as shown in O.P.(MV)No.105 of 1997 is true and correct, then the vehicle has got valid coverage upto 8.4.1997. So, it is a matter that requires consideration. More over, the appellant has also made an application before this Tribunal requesting the insurance company to produce the said policy. Certainly some documents will be available with the insurance company regarding the same or at least the case file regarding O.P.(MV)No.105 of 1997which will be helpful to find out the existence of the policy. Therefore I set aside the award so far as it relates to the fixation of liability is concerned and an opportunity is given to the present appellant to file a written statement giving specifications and number of the policy and also permit the insurance company to file additional written statement and produce necessary documents in support of her contentions. Thereafter the Tribunal shall consider the question of validity of the policy and the contention raised by the insurance company regarding interest and the matter be dispose of. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 21.1.2009. On that date, the receipt regarding payment of cost ordered in C.M.A.No.1610/2008 in this case also be produced with a memo so that the Tribunal can proceed with the matter. The appellant is permitted to take back Annexures A to E and produce them before the Tribunal. MACA 1634/2008 -:3:- MACA is disposed of as above. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Cdp/-