IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2008 / 12TH ASHADHA 1930 MACA.No. 819 of 2006() ---------------------- OPMV.96/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, WAYANAD .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER : ------------------------------------- RAMADAS.M, S/O.MUNDAN, PUTHENVEEDU HOUSE, P.O.THARUVANA, MANANTHAVADY TALUK, WAYANAD. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE SRI.JOSICHAN KORAH JOSE RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 3 : ------------------------------------------------------------- 1. P.P.ABOOBACKER KOYA @ ABOO, S/O.AMMEDH, PAROPANIYIL HOUSE, KODUVALLY AMSOM, DESOM, P.O.KODUVALLY. 2. P.P.MUHAMMED, S/O.KUNHAVUTTY, NELLIKKAPARAMBATH HOUSE, NELLIKKAPARAMBATH.P.O, MUKKAM. 3. THE MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CITY BRANCH, MAVOOR ROAD, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.T.KRISHNAN UNNI (SR.) - R1 SRI.C.V.BIMAL ROY - R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------ M.A.C.A.No. 819 of 2006 ------------------------------ Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accident claims Tribunal, Kalpetta in O.P. (MV) No. 96/1999. The claimant sustained a fracture in the clavicle and the tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs. 54,440/-. The tribunal found that there is no policy and therefore exonerated the Insurance Company from the liability. The appeal is preferred by the claimant for enhancing the compensation as well as against the exclusion and the liability of the Insurance Company. The learned counsel for the appellant along with the appeal had produced two documents. Those documents are with respect to the claim by a person, who had sustained injuries in the very same accident and had filed O.P. 49/1999. In the written statement therein, which is produced as annexure B, in para 7 there is a specific admission that the vehicle No. KL. 11A.6158 and KL. 11D.6275 were insured with these respondents at the time of the alleged accident. M.A.C.A. 819/ 2006 Page numbers Annexure A would show that admitting the same, O.P. 49/1999 has been compromised by insurance company for a sum of Rs.6,000/- with an undertaking to produce cheque for the said amount before the tribunal. So a composite reading of Annexure A and Annexure B would reveal regarding the admission of the policy by the Insurance company and its liability in O.P. 49/1999. It is in the very same accident, the present claimant also sustained injuries wherein the insurance company would contend otherwise. It cannot be accepted. Therefore, the finding of the tribunal exonerating the Insurance Company from the liability is liable to be set aside and I do so. So far as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the tribunal has accepted the disability certificate as such fixed the income at Rs. 1,200/- and has awarded a reasonable compensation of Rs. 54,440/-. Though the learned counsel for the appellant contends that it is inadequate, an overall analysis of the materials would reveal that just and reasonable compensation has been awarded. So, that finding does not call for inference. M.A.C.A. 819/ 2006 Page numbers In the result, M.A.C.A is disposed of as follows. The finding on quantum of compensation is confirmed. So far as the liability is concerned, it is found that Insurance Company is liable to indemnify the owner. Therefore, in the operative portion of it has to be stated that respondents 1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable and that the third respondent, Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. M. N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE scm M.A.C.A. 819/ 2006 Page numbers