IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 114 of 2005()
1. K.DASAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. S.SATHYAKUMAR,
... Respondent
2. G.RAVEENDRAN NAIR, S/O.GANGADHARA PILLAI
3. DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
For Petitioner :SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR
For Respondent :SRI.S.MAMMU
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :09/07/2008
O R D E R
M.N.KRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------
M.A.C.A. No. 114 OF 2005
---------------------
Dated this the 9th day of July, 2008
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram, in OP(MV)
1396/95. The Tribunal by its award dated 3.12.02 has awarded a
compensation of Rs.44,200/- with 9% interest to the claimant and
exonerated the Insurance Company from the liability on account of
the fact that the claimant did not succeed in proving the policy.
Subsequently the claimant filed IA 3804/02 for reviewing the award.
It is submitted therein that there is a valid policy and the Insurance
Company happened to deny the policy on account of the fact that it
has misunderstood the number of the vehicle. However, the Tribunal
did not entertain that application and dismissed the same.
2. The only point that arises for determination is regarding
the existence of a valid policy for the vehicle which got involved in the
accident. If there is a policy then certainly the Insurance Company is
bound to indemnify the owner. It is submitted that the policy is valid
and it has been produced along with the review application. I feel the
matter requires reconsideration.
MACA No.114/05 2
Therefore, the award under challenge is set aside to the
extent it exonerate the Insurance Company from the liability. The
claimant as well as the Insurance Company are permitted to produce
documentary evidence as well as oral evidence in support of their
respective contention regarding the existence of a valid policy on the
date of the accident.
Parties are directed to appear before the court below on
18.8.08.
M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE
vps
MACA No.114/05 3