IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2008 / 22ND SRAVANA 1930 MFA.No.232 of 2003 ( ) ---------------------------- OP(MV).736/1996 of MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM. .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, METRO PALACE, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB (SR.) RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1, 2, & 4: --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. INDIRA PARAMESWARAN, BIJU NIVAS, ANAYARA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. PEERMOHAMMED, T.C.34/1180, VALLAKKADAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. K. GOPAKUMAR, S/O. KARUNAKARAN, WARD NO.4, ANAYARA, THITTAMUDUKKIL VEEDU, KADAKAMPALLY VILLAGE, ANAYARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. PRADEEP ALIAS MONUKUTTAN, S/O.VIJAYAN K.P., VII/124, VARUVILAKAM VEEDU, KADAKAMPALLY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP FOR R1 SRI.V.VIJULAL FOR R1 SRI.C.V.BIMAL ROY FOR R3 SRI.A.S.SABU FOR R3 THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J. B. KOSHY & K. P. BALACHANDRAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ M. F. A. No.232 of 2003 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT J. B. Koshy, J This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company. The first respondent filed application for compensation for injuries sustained by her contending that while she was standing in the roadside she was hit by a scooter due to the negligence of the rider of the scooter. The second respondent in the appeal is the owner of the scooter and the third respondent is the rider of the scooter. The appellant/Insurance Company insured the scooter. 2. Two contentions were raised by the appellant. The first contention is that at the time of the accident, the owner of the vehicle M. F. A. No.232 of 2003 -2- was not the insured. But as held by the Hon. Supreme Court interpreting provisions of Section 157, the insurance is for the vehicle and despite the transfer Insurance Company is liable for third party liabilities. {See Rikhi Ram and another v. Smt.Sukhrania and others (AIR 2003 SC 1446) and G. Govindan v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and others (AIR 1999 SC 1398)}. Secondly, it was contended that there was no licence for the rider of the scooter. Even though owner and rider were made parties they remained ex parte. Notice was served to R3 but he did not enter appearance. Notice was served to R2 by paper publication. The order sheet would show that R3 accepted the notice. Despite the specific allegation that R3 had no driving licence, he did not care to produce his driving licence. R2 also did not enter M. F. A. No.232 of 2003 -3- appearance before the Tribunal and deny the allegations that the scooter was driven by R3, a person who has no valid licence at the time of accident. R3 was charge sheeted for driving the vehicle without a valid driving licence as can be seen from Ext.A4. In the circumstances, there is violation of the policy conditions. So the amount awarded is directed to be deposited by the Insurance Company. But the Insurance Company is allowed to recover the amount from the insured and driver due to violation of the policy conditions. J. B. KOSHY JUDGE K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE kns/-