IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2008 / 29TH ASWINA 1930 MACA.No.394 of 2003 (C) ------------------------------ OPMV.5266/1995 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, VADAKARA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------------------------- E.T.MARY, W/O. JOSEPH, ELLICKAL MARUTHONKARA AMSOM DESOM, P.O. PASUKKADAVU, VADAKARA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.NARAYANAN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------- 1. T.T.ASHOKAN, S/O. KUMKAR, THAYILETHARAMMEL HOUSE, VADAYAM AMSOM, P.O. VADAYAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT (R.C. OWNER KL 11/B 9323 - BUS). 2. MUHAMMAD K.K., S/O. MAMMY, KUDIYILAKANDY HOUSE, THRIKKUTTASSERI AMSOM, VAKAYAD DESOM, DRIVER, D/L 1207178 BADGE NO.1347/81. 3. THE MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., POLICY NO.17020410/31/40/9246/93, BRANCH OFFICE, VATAKARA. ADV. SRI.M.A.GEORGE FOR R3 SMT. DEEPA GEORGE THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/10/2008, ALONG WITH MACA NO.435 OF 2003, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J. B. KOSHY & K. P. BALACHANDRAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ M. A. C. A. Nos.394 & 435 of 2003 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 21st day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy, J Appellants are the claimants who were injured in the same accident. The Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the second respondent/ driver of the vehicle owned by the first respondent. The third respondent/Insurance Company was made as a party contending that as per the police records it was that insurance company who insured the vehicle at the time of the accident. But Tribunal found that no evidence was adduced to show that there was valid insurance to the vehicle. Copy of the insurance policy was produced along with the appeal at the time of hearing. We directed the Standing Counsel for the Insurance Company to M. A. C. A. Nos.394 &435 of 2003 -2- verify whether such a policy was issued. It was submitted that such a policy was issued in the name of the first respondent/owner of the vehicle. Since a valid policy was issued by the third respondent/Insurance Company, the awarded amount should be deposited by the Insurance Company. Therefore, third respondent/ Insurance Company is directed to deposit the awarded amount with interest as directed by the Tribunal. Both the appeals are allowed to the above extent. J. B. KOSHY JUDGE K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE kns/-