IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 20TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 29TH BHADRA 1932 MACA.No. 787 of 2009() -------------------- OPMV.1880/1999 OFMOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA ............................................. APPELLANT : 3RD RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------------ UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, PATHANAMTHITTA NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, “SHARANYA”, HOSPITAL ROAD, KOCHI – 11. BY ADVS. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI. JACOB MATHEW P. RESPONDENTS : PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ABDUL RAHUMAN, S/O. ABDUL RAHUMAN RAWTHER, REHUMANIYA MANZIL, PADUTHODU, PURAMATTOM VILLAGE, MALLAPPALLY TALUK. 2. P.C. MATHEW, PULIMOOTTIL HOUSE, PANNIKKUZHI, KAVUMGUMPRAYAR, PURAMATTOM, MALLAPPALLY. 3. BENSE MATHEW, W/O. MATHEW VARGHESE, MUNDAMANNIL HOUSE, KAVUMGUMPRAYAR, PURAMATTOM, MALLAPPALLY. R1 BY ADV. SRI.ESM.KABEER THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- MACA.No. 787 of 2009 -2- ORDER ON IA.NO. 988/2009 IN MACA.No. 787/2009 DISMISSED 20/09/2010 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 787 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 20th day of September, 2010. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pathanamthitta in O.P.(MV) 1880/99. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs.17,800/- with a liability to respondents 1 to 3 to pay the amount. Unfortunately all the respondents including the insurance company remained exparte in the case. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the claimant. It has to be stated that the insurance company should have been more vigilant but now the contention is to the effect that the vehicle was not covered by any policy. When there is no policy it may not be proper to affix the liability on the insurance company. But under Rule 76 of the Kerala Motor Vehicle's Rules it is the responsibility of the insurance company to prove the existence or non existence of a policy. Though it is negative M.A.C.A. 787 OF 2009 -:2:- it is a burden cast on them. But it has to be stated the company can be permitted to take all possible steps to get the correctness of the said fact even by summoning the owner or to peruse the police records regarding the particulars of policy. Equally the claimant can also do the same for the reason it is ultimately he who is affected if insurance company is totally exonerated from the liability. Therefore the award under challenge is set aside without disturbing the quantum and remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration by permitting the insurance company to file a written statement and thereafter permitting all concerned to let in evidence both documentary as well as oral in support of their respective contention and then to dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 29.10.2010. Since it is an old accident the matter be disposed of within three months from the date of first appearance of the parties. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-