IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2010 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 MACA.No. 1900 of 2010(C) ------------------------------------- [O.P(MV).NO.454/2002 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, VADAKARA] .................... APPELLANT/3RD REPONDENT: --------------------------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., VADAKARA, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM NORTH, KOCHI-18. BY ADVS. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA), SRI.ALEXY AUGUSTINE, SMT.K.S.SANTHI, SMT.LATHA SUSAN CHERIAN. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2: ------------------------------------------------------- 1. P.K.SUBAIR, PUTHALATH KANDY HOUSE, P.O.POONATH, PIN-673 614. R.C. OWNER. 2. AZIZ, S/O. KUNHABDULLA, PULPARA HOUSE, P.O.KAYANNA, PIN-653 525. (DRIVER). BY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/12/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.NO.1900 OF 2010 ............................................. Dated this the 17th day of December, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Vadakara in OP(MV)No.454/2002. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal has awarded him a compensation of Rs.35,351/= with a direction to the insurance company to pay the amount. 2. The insurance company has challenged its liability on the ground that the driver did not have the valid driving licence or badge and therefore, it is not liable to pay the amount. In para 14 of the award, the Tribunal just recorded that no steps are taken by the third respondent to summon the documents from respondents 1 or 2. But I am informed by the learned counsel for the insurance company that such an application was filed as I.A.No.343/2004 and in spite of an order, the owner and the driver did not produce the driving licence. 3. It is true that burden is on the insurance company, : 2 : M.A.C.A.NO.1900 OF 2010 but there are limitations for the insurance company to get the particulars. They can only summon the person in custody of the documents. When those people refused to produce it, necessarily a logical conclusion is to be reached. But in this case, unfortunately I find that the Tribunal has not adverted to that contention. Therefore, I feel that an opportunity has to be given to the insurance company as well as to the owner and the driver. 4. So the award under challenge is set aside so far as it relates to the inter se liability between the insurer and the owner is concerned and a direction is given to the Tribunal to permit all concerned to produce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contention on this question and thereafter dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 24.01.2011. The insurance company shall take out notice to the owner for a proper further proceeding of the case. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. : 3 : M.A.C.A.NO.1900 OF 2010 cl : 4 : M.A.C.A.NO.1900 OF 2010 M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... A.S.NO.389 OF 2001 ............................................. 11th day of November, 2010. J U D G M E N T