-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA FIRST APPEAL NO. 210 OF 2003 (1) Smt. Fatima Barreto, Wife of Domnic Barretto, (2) Kum. Sweety Barreto, Daughter of Domnic Barretto, Aged 8 years, being minor, represented by Her mother Smt. Fatima Barretto. (3) Smt. Dumentina Barreto, Wife of late Shri Francisco Barretto, All r/o. H. No. 703, Dulkhap, Kakoda, Curchorem, Goa. …... Appellants V e r s u s (1) Shri Balsu Ullhas Xetkar r/o. H. No. 287/2, Sirvoi, Zambaulim, Quepem-Goa. (Driver) (2) Shri Shivram D. Naik Rane, R/o. H. No. not known, Sanmudgeri, Anangdi, Karwar, Karnataka (Owner) (3) National Insurance Co. Ltd. 1628, Kainine road, Karwar Karnataka. (Insurer). .….. Respondents Mr. C. A. Coutinho, Advocate for the Appellants. Mr. J. J. Mulgaonkar, Advocate for the Respondents. CORAM: R. M. SAVANT, J. DATE : 4 th March, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT The above Appeal arises out of the Judgment and Award dated -2- 15/05/2003, passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, South Goa, Margao, in Claim Petition no. 206/2001, filed by the Appellants herein. The said Award is challenged solely on the ground that the Respondent no.3-Insurance Company, has not been made liable and the Respondent nos. 1 and 2 have been directed to pay the said amount. 2. The facts in brief can be stated thus : The Appellants herein are the heirs of late Domnic Barretto, who expired in consequence of the injuries sustained by him in a road accident which took place on 05.01.2001 at Karmalghat, Quepem. The motorcycle driven by the deceased Domnic was given a dash by a Pick-up vehicle bearing no. KA-30-4143, which was driven by the Respondent no.1 and which was owned by the Respondent no.2 and insured with the Respondent no.3. It was the case of the Appellants that the said Pick up vehicle was driven in a rash and negligent manner resulting in the accident which led to the death of late Dominic Barretto. It was their case that the said Domnic was the only earning member of the family and, therefore, they claimed an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation under various heads. Though the Respondents were served in the said Claim Petition, none of the Respondents appeared and, therefore, the matter proceeded exparte against them. In so far as the present Appeal is concerned, issue no.3 of the issues framed by the Claim's Tribunal, is material and is re-produced herein under : “Issue no. 3 : Do the applicants prove that they are entitled to claim the compensation ? -3- 3. The said issue was held to be proved by the Claims Tribunal, however, the Claims Tribunal has refused to make the Respondent no.3- Insurance Company liable as details of the Insurance Policy in the matter of its validity etc. were not produced and what was produced was the Policy of the year 2000 and there was no material on record that the Policy was valid on the date of the accident i.e. 05.06.2001. The Tribunal was of the view that merely because the Insurance Certificate was produced, the liability could not be fastened on Respondent no.3 in the absence of their being material to show the validity of the Insurance Policy on the day of the accident. 4. In the above Appeal, at the time of admission, Civil Application no. 197/2003 came to be filed by the Appellants above named to place the Insurance Policy on record. To the said Civil Application, a true xerox copy of the original Insurance Policy was appended. The same Civil Application came to be allowed by Order dated 04.09.2003, as a result of which, the Insurance Policy was allowed to be produced on record. 5. A perusal of the Insurance Policy discloses that the vehicle bearing no.KA-30-4143 is covered and that the said Policy is a comprehensive Policy and the validity of the said Policy is from 14.03.2001 to 13.03.2002 and, therefore, the said Policy was valid on the day the accident took place i.e. 05.06.2001. The learned Counsel for the Respondent no.3 does not dispute the aforesaid position. -4- 6. In the light of the Insurance Policy which has been placed on record in the above First Appeal, the impugned Award would have to be modified. The liability would have to be fastened on the Respondent no.3- Insurance Company. The impugned Award is, therefore, modified as under : “The Appellants herein i.e. the Applicants before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, South Goa, Margao, are ordered to be paid the amount of Rs.6,18,715/- by the Respondent no.3 along with Simple Interest at the rate of 8% per annum from 16.08.2001 till the final payment. The applicants are also awarded costs of Rs.2,000/- recoverable from the Respondent no.3.” 7. The First Appeal is accordingly allowed to the above extent. R. M. SAVANT, J arp/*