High Court Kerala High Court

P. Gireesh Babu vs C. Kunhambu on 12 March, 2007

Kerala High Court
P. Gireesh Babu vs C. Kunhambu on 12 March, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA No. 2108 of 2006()


1. P. GIREESH BABU, S/O. KUMARAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. C. KUNHAMBU, S/O. PAITHAL,
                       ...       Respondent

2. PALANGAT PARAMBIL ASHARAF,

3. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,

                For Petitioner  :SMT.S.AMBIKA DEVI

                For Respondent  :SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN THIRUVALLA

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.PADMANABHAN NAIR

 Dated :12/03/2007

 O R D E R
                        K.Padmanabhan Nair,J.

                      --------------------------------

                       M.A.C.A.No.2108 of 2006-A

                      --------------------------------


                Dated, this the 12th day of March, 2007


                                 JUDGMENT

Heard. Admitted. Sri.George Cherian takes notice for

the 3rd respondent. In view of the contention raised by the

appellant in the appeal, notice to respondents 1 and 2, who are

the claimant and driver respectively, is dispensed with and the

appeal itself is heard and disposed of.

2. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.59,000/- as

compensation and held that respondents 1 to 3 therein are

jointly and severally liable for the same, but added a rider to that

award that the 3rd respondent-Insurer is at liberty to realise the

award amount from the appellant-2nd respondent, the registered

owner of the scooter as the driver of the vehicle is not possessed

of a valid driving licence.

3. In this appeal, the appellant filed a petition to

accept additional evidence to show that the driver was holding a

valid driving licence at the time of incident. Appellant produced a

copy of the Driving Licence as well as Passport. He also produced

M.A.C.A.No.2108 of 2006

– 2 –

the original Driving Licence for verification. The application was

allowed and the copies of the Driving Licence and Passport were

marked as Exhibits B1 and B2. In view of the additional evidence

adduced in this appeal, the liberty given to the Insurer to recover

the amount from the registered owner, the appellant, is to be

vacated.

In the result, the appeal is allowed to the extent of

vacating that part of the award by which the 3rd

respondent-Insurer was given liberty to realise the award amount

from the appellant, the registered owner of the scooter, who was

the 2nd respondent in the claim petition. I.A.No.2351 of 2006

shall stand dismissed.

K.Padmanabhan Nair

Judge

vku/-