Biju George v. v.v.Ali
Case brief
What is this about?
The MACT dismissed the claim against the insurance company but rejected liability of the other respondents. The High Court allowed an opportunity to adduce evidence against the moped owner and driver, subject to proof of insurance coverage.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN
TUESDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2008 / 21ST SRAVANA 1930
MACA.No. 248 of 2003()
---------------------OPMV.864/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR
APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER
BIJU GEORGE S/O. K.A.GEORGE,
KOCHATU HOUSE, POICKATTUSSERY, P.O. CHANGANANED, ERNAKULAM 683578
BY ADV. SRI.P.V.CHANDRA MOHAN SRI.T.VENUGOPALAN
RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to dismiss the appeal against the insurance company which successfully pleaded policy expiry.
Whether the appellate court should remit the matter for a new hearing to adduce evidence against the moped owner and driver.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Biju George
- respondent
V.V. Ali
- respondent
Kunjumoiden
- respondent
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court