THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO M.A.CIVIAL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.183 of 2008 Being aggrieved by the Judgment and decree passed in O.P.No.222 of 2006 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal – cum – III Additional District Court, Anantapur, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant – insurance company urged that the Order of the lower Court is not sustainable as claimants failed to file the policy relating to the offending vehicle in question and having known the Orders of the Court, the claimants filed review petition and the same was returned with the endorsement to prefer appeal against the award passed by the lower Court. 3. Now, the point for consideration is: Whether the Order of the lower Court is sustainable? P O I N T: 4. As seen from the impugned Order, no policy was marked either on behalf of the claimants or on behalf of the respondents. The lower Court while discussing the evidence of P.W.1 fastened the liability against the respondents. When a claim is made against the owner of the offending vehicle and the insurance company, it is the burden on the petitioners/claimants to prove that the offending vehicle had valid insurance coverage on the date of the accident. In the present case, the claimants did not file the insurance policy for claiming any compensation against the insurance company. First respondent remained ex parte before the lower Court. 5. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the appellant urged that on verification of the records basing on the information furnished by the claimants there was no insurance coverage for the offending vehicle as on the date of the accident. Hence, they filed review petition. 6. It is an admitted fact that the claimants have not filed insurance policy relating to the offending vehicle in question before the tribunal below. The tribunal without taking cognizance of the same awarded compensation fastening the liability on the 2nd respondent, who is the appellant herein. 7. It is urged by the learned counsel for the appellant an opportunity may be given to the insurance company so that they may adduce evidence for better adjudication of the matter. While taking into consideration the circumstances of the case, the aforesaid argument, in my view, is quite justified. 8. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed while setting aside the Order of the lower Court. The O.P. is remanded back to the lower Court with a direction to dispose of the O.P. as expeditiously as possible by giving notices to either parties to adduce their evidence for better adjudication of the matter. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ K.S.APPA RAO, J 23rd March, 2011 KSP