IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 14TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 23RD KARTHIKA 1930 MACA.No. 1776 of 2006(G) ------------------------------------- OP(MV).NO.2701/2001 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. .................... APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT IN OP(MV): -------------------------------------------------------------- THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.PRABHAKARAN, SC, K.S.R.T.C. RESPONDENTS/ PETITIONER AND 2ND RESPONDENT IN OP(MV): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. A.A. SAMAD, S/O. ABDUL KHADER, 4/1530, PULLUPALAM ROAD, FORTKOCHI, KOCHI-1. 2. K.L. JOHN, KOTTAKAITHAYIL HOUSE, ERAYAMANGALAM DESOM, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. *ADDL.R3. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, ST. JOSEPH PRESS ROAD, VAZHUTHAKKAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. *ADDL.R3. IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 14/11/2008 IN I.A. NO. 2055/2006. ADDL. R3. BY ADV. SRI.P.JAYASANKAR. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/11/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.N.KRISHNAN, J ===================== MACA No.1776 OF 2006 ===================== Dated this the 14th day of November 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam in O.P.(MV)No.2701/2001. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.43,000/- and directed the first respondent to deposit the amount. It is against that decision, the present appeal is filed. During the pendency of the appeal, the KSRTC has filed an application to implead the insurance company and it has been allowed. 2. The contention to be looked into is whether there has been any valid insurance coverage for the vehicle involved in the accident on the date of accident. Unfortunately nobody took any steps to implead the insurance company. There was an averment in the written statement of the KSRTC that the vehicle was validly insured with the national insurance company but it also did not pursue that question which resulted in non-impleadment of the company and ultimately passing of the award against KSRTC and its driver. If there is a valid coverage necessarily the insurance company has MACA 1776/2006 -:2:- to indemnify the owner. So for the limited purpose of finding out whether there is any valid insurance coverage and whether there is any breach of policy conditions under Section 149(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal. No other finding be disturbed. Therefore the award under challenge is set aside so far as it relates to the question whether KSRTC is liable to pay the amount or it is to be paid by the insurance company, if there is a valid insurance coverage. For that purpose, if the claimant does not co-operate, the KSRTC is directed to implead the national insurance company before the Tribunal and on impleadment, it can file written statement and raise the defence available under Section 149(2) of the Act and then the matter be disposed of in accordance with law. Needless to say that the liability of the insurance company to pay interest on any amount awarded will arise only after it is impleaded before the Tribunal. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 29.12.2008. MACA is disposed of as above. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Cdp/-