Omanakuttan Korattiyil vs Babychen K. Varghese, Jomon and The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

A.K. Basheer, J.—These two appeals are being disposed of through this common judgment, since they are directed against the same award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in a claim petition filed u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. MACA No. 33/2010 is at the instance of the owner of the vehicle which was involved in the accident, while MACA 500/2009 is by the claimant.

MACA No. 33 of 2010:

The grievance of the owner is that the insurance company has mulcted the Appellant with the liability to pay the compensation without considering the fact that his driver did in fact possess a valid license and badge at the time of the accident.

But it may at once be noticed that the Appellant did not contest the case before the Tribunal and produce any document in support of his case that the driver had a valid driving license and a badge. It is true that the Appellant has produced two documents before us which are marked in the case as Annexures A1 and A5 which may prima facie show that the driver possessed a valid license. As regards the badge, it is contended by the learned Counsel that going by the type of the vehicle which was involved in the accident, the driver need not have possessed a badge. Anyhow, we do not propose to deal with that issue at this stage in view of the order that we propose to pass.

It is true that the Tribunal had not looked into the above aspect for the obvious reason that the Appellant had not appeared or contested the case.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the finding of the Tribunal on issue No. 3 is set aside and the Appellant is given an opportunity to adduce evidence in the case on condition that he deposits a sum of Rs. 5,000/-

before the Tribunal towards cost payable to the insurance company, within one month from today failing which the appeal shall stand dismissed.

The Tribunal shall reconsider the question of liability after affording the Appellant and the insurance company reasonable opportunity to adduce evidence, both oral and documentary. The Appellant and the insurance company shall appear before the Tribunal on April 30, 2011. The Tribunal shall dispose of the matter on or before July 29, 2011.

MACA No. 500 of 2009:

The grievance of the Appellant/claimant is that the Tribunal has committed serious illegality in refusing to award any compensation under the head of disability though Ext.A10 disability certificate was produced indicating that he had suffered 15% disability. Learned Counsel for the Appellant has taken us through the relevant portions of the award and particularly the injuries sustained by the Appellant in the accident.

Having regard to the nature of the injuries, we are satisfied that the Appellant can be awarded a sum of Rs. 15,000/- as additional compensation under the head of disability. In all other respects, the award passed by the Tribunal is confirmed.