High Court Kerala High Court

The Branch Manager vs Puthiya Purayil Govindan on 5 January, 2009

Kerala High Court
The Branch Manager vs Puthiya Purayil Govindan on 5 January, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 1245 of 2008()


1. THE BRANCH MANAGER, M/S.NEW INDIA
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. PUTHIYA PURAYIL GOVINDAN,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THAZHEKURUNTHIL UDAYAKUMAR,

3. N.BALAKRISHNAN, S/O.K.K.KARTHYAAYANI,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.MAMMU

                For Respondent  :SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

 Dated :05/01/2009

 O R D E R
                         M.N. KRISHNAN, J
                         -----------------------
                   M.A.C.A.No. 1245 OF 2008
                   ---------------------------------
               Dated this the 5th day of January, 2009


                              JUDGMENT

This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal, Thalassery in O.P.(MV) No.501/2001. The

claim is one for damages and the tribunal granted compensation of

Rs. 28,500/- and directed the 3rd respondent to pay the amount. A

perusal of para 8 of the award would reveal that the 3rd respondent

has filed an additional written statement raising the contention that

there was no valid driving licence for the driver and therefore it

amounts to breach of policy conditions and so it is entitled to get

reimbursement. But at the time of passing the award the tribunal

did not consider Exts. B1 and B2 on the ground that the additional

written statement has been filed without a petition. I think the said

approach is erroneous. It requires consideration. After permitting

the parties to proceed with the trial and marking of Exts. B1 and B2

at the last stage, it is not proper to discard that contention on the

ground that no application is filed to receive the additional written

statement. The court should have directed the Company to file

such application to receive additional written statement. Therefore

M.A.C.A.No. 1245/2008
-2-

in order to decide the inter se dispute between the owner and the

Insurance Company the matter requires reconsideration.

Therefore the award is set aside to that extent and the matter

is remitted back to the tribunal for fresh consideration by permitting

the Insurance Company if insisted by the tribunal to file an

application for acceptance of additional written statement and

permit all the parties to adduce evidence in support of their

respective contentions and then dispose of the matter in accordance

with law. The Insurance Company is directed to take out notice to

the owner after its appearance before the tribunal.

Parties are directed to appear before the tribunal on

16.2.2009.

M.N. KRISHNAN,JUDGE
vkm