High Court Kerala High Court

Gopalakrishna Pillai vs Mr.Manmadhan Pillai on 15 November, 2010

Kerala High Court
Gopalakrishna Pillai vs Mr.Manmadhan Pillai on 15 November, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 550 of 2010()


1. GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. MR.MANMADHAN PILLAI, DWARAKA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. MR.ANIL KUMAR, S/O.SARASWATHY AMMA,

3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.B.MOHANLAL

                For Respondent  :SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA)

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

 Dated :15/11/2010

 O R D E R
                      M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
               = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                 M.A.C.A. NO. 550 OF 2010
             = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
      Dated this the 15th day of November, 2010.

                       J U D G M E N T

This appeal is preferred against the award of the

Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kollam in O.P.(MV)

837/06. The claimant, a motorcyclist, sustained

injuries in a road accident when it collied with an auto

rickshaw. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of

Rs.60,700/- and found that since there is no evidence to

show that there is a valid driving licence and badge for

the auto rickshaw driver exonerated the insurance

company from the liability and held respondents 1 and 2

jointly and severally liable to pay the amount. It is

against the exoneration of the insurance company from

the liability, the claimant has come up in appeal.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as

well as the insurance company. The learned counsel

for the appellant submits before me that the licence

M.A.C.A. 550 OF 2010
-:2:-

particulars are available in Ext.A2 scene mahazar and he

had also given me a copy of the said scene mahazar

which would indicate that there had been a driving

licence for the driver. When this material was available

it was incumbent upon the insurance company to prove

the absence of the same and if they were really

contesting for the position that he did not have a badge

that also is a matter which one could have proved since

particulars are available in the scene mahazar. It has

become a practice of the insurance companies now that

without taking any steps to get the particulars just file

an application calling upon ever exparte remaining

owner and driver to produce the licence and then

requesting the Court to draw an adverse inference. I

think it may not help the implementation of justice at

all. I do not want to say further on that.

3. In this case when the particulars are available

in the scene mahazar the insurance company was bound

M.A.C.A. 550 OF 2010
-:3:-

to find out the truth of it and produce materials by

getting the extract from the R.T.O. office showing the

absence of licence or badge whatever it may be, to

satisfy the conscience of the Court. Therefore I am

inclined to set aside the award exonerating the

insurance company from the liability and give an

opportunity to all concerned to produce both

documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their

respective contentions regarding the existence and the

validity of the licence and badge before the Tribunal.

Needless to say that I am not interfering with the

quantum awarded. The parties are directed to appear

before the Tribunal on 23.12.10.

M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.

ul/-