IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.PADMANABHAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2008 / 20TH CHAITHRA 1930 MACA.No. 523 of 2008() ---------------------- OPMV.675/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT/FIRST RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------ P.KARUNAKARAN, KARUNALAYAM, PUNNAMOODUKARA, MAVELIKARA P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER/RESPONDENTS II AND III IN OP(MV) ---------------------------------- 1. PRADEEP, S/O. SUKUMARAN, MUNICIPAL COLONY, HOUSE NO.838, FATHIMAPURAM P.O., CHANGANASERRY. 2. SUNILAL, S/O. DIVAKARAN, KADUVATHRA THEKKETHIL VEEDU, WARD-II, KANDALLOOR PANCHAYAT, KARTHIKAPPALLY TALUK. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, T.H.T.TOWERS, MARKET ROAD, MUVATTUPUZHA, REP. BY THE MANAGER. R3 BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB (SR.) THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/04/2008, ALONG WITH MACA NO. 1561 OF 2007 AND CONNECTED CASES THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. PADMANABHAN NAIR ,J. ------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A Nos.1561 of 2007 523 of 2008 543 of 2008 544 of 2008 & 548 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 9th day of April, 2008 JUDGMENT All these cases arise from a common award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam disposing of a number of claim petitions together. 2. Appellant is the registered owner of a stage carriage bus bearing registration No.KDE 2628. Bus owned by the appellant met with an accident on 9.11.1997. A number of passengers travelling in the vehicle sustained injuries. The injured filed Original Petitions claiming compensation. The appellant as well as driver did not appear and contest. Insurer alone contested the matter. Insurer raised a contention that the second respondent driver was not having a valid driving licence. Holding that there was violation of policy conditions Tribunal directed the insurer to pay the compensation awarded to the claimants and then recover the same from the appellant. Challenging those awards these appeals are filed. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that in the final report filed in the criminal case it was stated that the vehicle was driven by a person having valid driving licence. Appellant has produced the particulars of the driving licence in M.A.C.A.No.596/2007. Relying on that evidence I took a MACA No.1561/2007 & Connected Cases 2 view that the driver of the vehicle was having a valid driving licence on the date of accident and hence the Tribunal went wrong in exonerating the insurer. The award passed by the Tribunal directing the insurer to pay compensation and then recover the same from the appellant insured was interfered and set aside. That finding is binding on the insurer. Hence all these appeals are to be allowed in part. In the result, all the appeals are allowed in part. The permission given by the Tribunal to the insurer to recover the amount from the appellant insured alone in all the awards which are the subject matter of these appeals are hereby set aside. I hold that the insurer is liable to indemnify the insured. In all other respects the award passed by the Tribunal is confirmed. K. PADMANABHAN NAIR, JUDGE. cks