IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 20TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 29TH BHADRA 1932 MACA.No. 905 of 2009() -------------------- OPMV.2345/2002 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM ................... APPELLANT / 2ND RESPONDENT : ---------------------------------------------- NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, REP.BY THE MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE,PALARIVATTOM. BY ADV. SRI.RAJAN P.KALIYATH RESPONDENTS / PETITIONERS & R1 : ---------------------------------------------------- 1. THRESSIAMA LONAN, W/O.LONAN, ODATHINGAL HOUSE, SRM ROAD,THRIKKANARVATTOM, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE,KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT (DIED). 2. STANLY,S/O.LATE LONAN,AGED 58, ODATHINGAL HOUSE,SRM ROAD,THRIKKANARVATTOM, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- MACA.No. 905 of 2009 -2- ORDER ON IA.NO. 1177/2009 IN MACA.No. 905/2009 DISMISSED 20/09/2010 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 905 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 20th day of September, 2010. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam in O.P.(MV)2345/02. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident when he is alleged to have been knocked down by a goods auto rickshaw. The Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs.16,000/-, directed the insurance company to pay the amount. It is against that order the insurance company has come up in appeal. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit before me that though there was a specific contention to the effect that the owner cum driver of the insured vehicle was not holding any valid driving licence to drive the vehicle and even though there was a charge sheet u/s 3(1) of the Act the Tribunal did not frame any issue regarding the said fact, did not consider the question at all and directed the insurance company to pay the amount even without a M.A.C.A. 905 OF 2009 -:2:- recovery clause. Therefore it has to be stated the Tribunal has not adverted to the contentions of the insurance company in the written statement and therefore it requires reconsideration. At the same time I do not want to disturb the award fixing the quantum. Therefore the award under challenge is set aside for the limited purpose of determining the question whether the insurance company is liable to pay the amount or at least entitled to get a right of recovery from the owner. For the purpose of proving regarding the existence of a valid licence, the Tribunal shall permit the parties to adduce both documentary as well as oral evidence after framing appropriate issues and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 30.10.2010. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-