IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 434 of 2004()
1. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
... Petitioner
Vs
1. YOUSUF, S/O.HASSAINAR,
... Respondent
2. HASSAINAR, S/O.ABDULLA, AGED 55 YEARS,
3. P.ABDUL RAHMAN @ ADHRUMA,
4. DHANANJAYA POOJARY,
For Petitioner :SMT.RAJI T.BHASKAR
For Respondent :SRI.SURESH KUMAR KODOTH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :05/10/2010
O R D E R
A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
M.A.C.A.No.434 OF 2004
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 5th day of October 2010
JUDGMENT
Basheer, J.
This appeal is directed against the award passed by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal in a petition filed under Section 166 of the
Motor Vehicles Act.
2. The Tribunal directed the appellant/insurance company to pay a
sum of Rs.71,100/- towards compensation to the claimant-respondent
No.1 herein. The only grievance of the appellant is that the Tribunal was
not justified in denying liberty to the appellant to recover the amount of
compensation from the owner of the vehicle, since he had permitted the
driver to drive the vehicle though he did not possess a valid driving
license and badge.
3. It is seen from the award that the appellant had taken a specific
contention that it would not be liable to indemnify the owner, since his
action was in violation of the policy conditions. The owner of the vehicle
did not appear before the Tribunal and contest the case though he was
served with notice. The driver in his counter statement contended that he
was not negligent. It is also seen from the record that the appellant had
filed I.A.358/02 seeking for a direction to the owner to produce the
driving license and badge issued in favour of the driver of the vehicle.
M.A.C.A.No.434 OF 2004
:: 2 ::
But the owner did not produce these documents even though the
interlocutory application was allowed.
4. We have carefully perused the materials available on record and
heard learned counsel for the appellant. Respondents 3 and 4, the owner
and driver, have not appeared before this court, though notice has been
served through paper publication.
5. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case,
we are satisfied that the appellant has to be given liberty to recover the
amount of compensation from the owner. We do so.
The award is modified to the above extent. The appeal is allowed.
A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE
P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE
jes