IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2010 / 13TH SRAVANA 1932 MACA.No. 72 of 2006() ------------------------------- OPMV.242/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KASARAGOD .................... APPELLANT(S):/3RD RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., METRO PALACE, GROUND FLOOR, OPP: NORTH RAILWAY STATION, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER. BY ADV. SRI.VPK.PANICKER RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 & PETITIONER ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. UBAID, S/O.MOIDEENKUTTY, UBAID MANZIL, CHERUMBAD, PANAYAL HOSDRUG TALUK. 2. HAMEED M.K., S/O,.ABDUL KHADER, THOYAMMAL HOUSE, BALLA POST, ANANDASTRAM (VIA), HOSDRUG TALUK. 3. NAZAR ALIAS A.P.ABDUL NAZAR, BATTATHUR, PALLIKKARA VILLAGE, P.O PANAYAL, HOSDRUG TALUK. R3 BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON IA. NO.305/2006 IN MACA. NO.72/2006 CLOSED 04/08/2010 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.NO.72 OF 2006 ............................................. Dated this the 4th day of August, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Kasaragod in OP(MV)No.242/2002. The claimant who sustained injuries in a road accident has been awarded a sum of Rs.14,900/= and the insurance company has been directed to pay the amount. The insurance company has come up in appeal with the grievance that it is entitled to get reimbursement from the owner for want of driving licence for the driver. The Tribunal held that private inspection report cannot be relied on and it was not accepted. The Tribunal found that there is no charge against the driver for driving the vehicle without licence. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant would contend that he has moved an application for production of the driving licence and it has not been produced. The fact to be proved is whether there is a valid driving licence or not. Catena of decisions had made it clear that the said burden is on the insurance company. The mode of proving the same : 2 : M.A.C.A.NO.72 OF 2006 is to be taken by the insurance company. Rule 376 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules also casts liability on the insurance company to give particulars of the licence. 3. Therefore I feel that it is a fit case where an opportunity can be given to the insurance company to prove that there was no driving licence for the driver. For the said purpose permission can be granted again to issue notice to the driver and the owner to produce driving licence particulars and thereafter what ever possible evidence can be let in, be let in and the matter be decided. 4. Therefore, the award under challenge is set aside to the limited extent of the inter se liability and recovery right between the insurance company and the owner and for the said purpose, the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal. Parties are permitted to adduce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions to establish their case. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 15.9.2010. Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. cl : 3 : M.A.C.A.NO.72 OF 2006 : 4 : M.A.C.A.NO.72 OF 2006 M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... A.S.NO.OF 2010 ............................................. 2nd day of August, 2010. J U D G M E N T