IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 12TH JULY 2010 / 21ST ASHADHA 1932 MACA.No. 523 of 2010() --------------------------------- OPMV.326/2005 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TIRUR .................... APPELLANT(S): 3RD RESPONDENT IN OP(MV) NO.326/05 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PARCO TOWER, P.N.RAJ ROAD, KOZHIKODE. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, KOCHI REGIONAL OFFICE, OMANA BUILDINGS, JEWS STREET, PADMA JUNCTION, KOCHI - 682 035. BY ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): CLAIMANT & THE RESPONDENTS IN OP(MV) 326/05 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. MULLAPPALLI AI @ MOHAMMEDALI, 27 YEARS, S/O.ALAVIKKUTTY HAJI, MULLAPPALLI HOUSE, PARANKIMOOCHIKKAL, CHAPPANANGADI POST, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THEKKEMANNIL DAMODARAN, S/O.KUNHUKUTTAN, MANNAZHI, CHENGOTTUR POST, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. KODAKKADAN HAMZA, S/O.MOHAMMEDKUTTY HAJI, KOLKALAM, CHENGOTTUR POST, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. R3 BY ADVS. SRI.K.RAMACHANDRAN, SRI.S.SREEDEV. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/07/2010, ALONG WITH MACA. 675 OF 2010 & WPC. NO.9924 OF 2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON IA. NO.688/2010 IN MACA. NO.523/2010 DISMISSED 12/07/2010 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NOs. 523, 675 OF 2010 and W.P.C.9924/10 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 12th day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T Both these appeals and the writ petition are filed against the awards passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Tirur in O.P.(MV)Nos.326/05, 325/05 and 332/05. The Tribunal passed an award for Rs.41,000/- in 326/05, Rs.15,000/- in 325/05 and Rs.5,500/- in 332/05. The short question that arises for determination in these cases are regarding the existence of a valid policy. The vehicle involved in the accident is a van bearing Reg.No.KL-10-G- 1317 and a motor bike. It is contended by the owner that the vehicle was validly insured with the National insurance company and he moved an application before the Tribunal for the production of the copy of the insurance policy bearing No.22306301 covering for the period from 26.2.00 to 23.2.01. To this the insurance company filed a reply stating that there is no such policy and it has not been issued from M.A.C.A. NOs. 523, 675 OF 2010 and W.P.C.9924/10 -:2:- the office. Now the Tribunal relies upon a reference to the investigation report submitted by one Aravindan wherein the policy number mentioned is shown as 300301. One cannot make the head and tail out of it. Normally an insurance policy is never issued with six numbers but the Tribunal states that since the investigator has filed a report the insurance company is bound by the same. If it is a properly submitted report there is real force in what the Tribunal has stated but the number shown in the petitioner's application and that of the investigators report does not reflect the true state of affairs. Further when the owner has given a specific number of the policy and it is replied by the insurance company that it has not issued such a policy then there are no materials before the Tribunal to arrive at a decision whether the vehicle was validly covered or not. I am conscious of the fact that Motor Vehicles Rules cast an obligation on the insurance company to collect the policy number and submit it before the Tribunal. But when the M.A.C.A. NOs. 523, 675 OF 2010 and W.P.C.9924/10 -:3:- cases had come up for trial the insurance company as well has failed in procuring number and it has to be attributed to the owner who is expected to be in possession of the original of the policy. Therefore unless materials are forthcoming it may not be possible to arrive at a correct decision. It is for the parties to make earnest efforts to find out the correct number of the policy so as to find out whether such a policy was there or not and also the owner can examine Sri.Aravindan to know on what basis he had prepared the report showing the number of policy which does not appear to be correct. It is also the paramount responsibility and duty of the insurance company to try its level best to find out whether a policy has been issued because it has got better resources and instrumentality for finding out the same. Therefore I set aside the award regarding the finding of the existence of a valid policy and remit all these cases back to the Tribunal with a direction to permit all concerned to produce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of M.A.C.A. NOs. 523, 675 OF 2010 and W.P.C.9924/10 -:4:- their respective contentions and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 19.8.2010. Let the claimant be also given a notice after the parties entering appearance before the Tribunal. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-