Allowed

National Insurance Co. Ltd., v. Rajan and Others

Kerala HC25 Oct 2018MACA/1685/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed the appeal of the National Insurance Company. The court held that the appellant's contention regarding suppression of facts and failure to inform the Registering authority of the vehicle transfer was not substantiated, and dismissed the appeal, directing payment of the award.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; appellant directed to satisfy the award within 10 days with interest.

National Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs Rajan and Others — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.D.RAJAN

¶4

THURSDAY ,THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1940

¶5

MACA.No. 1685 of 2009

¶6

AGAINST THE AWARD IN OPMV 197/2004 of MACT MUVATTUPUZHA DATED 0111-2007

¶7

APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT:

¶8

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REP. BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER,3RD PARTY WING, OMANA BUILDING, PADMA JUNCTION,, KOCHI-35.

¶9

BY ADV. SMT.RAJI T.BHASKAR

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 RAJAN, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, S/O.RAMAN, MULAMPATHU HOUSE, THONNALLOOR KARA, VELLOOR, VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK.

¶12

2 GOPI, S/O. NARAYANAN MANGALATHU HOUSE, MULAKKULAM, PIRAVOM KARA.

¶13

3 JOSEPH JOHN, S/O. JOHN, URAVAKUZHIYIL HOUSE, AREEKKARA,, VELIYANOOR VILLAGE. 4 P.R.SIVADASAN, PARAMBATHU HOUSE, UDAYAMPEROOR, ERNAKULAM.

¶14

BY ADVS. SMT.ANILA PETER SMT.K.N.RAJANI SRI.ANIL S.RAJ SRI.ANTONY VARGHESE SRI.MATHEWS K.PHILIP SRI.RADHIKA RAJASEKHARAN P.

¶15

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

MACA.No. 1685 of 2009

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

This appeal is preferred against the award in OP(MV) No.197/2004 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha by the insurer. The first respondent in this case sustained injuries in a motor accident and the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.5,34,750/- with interest and cost.

¶20

The accident was not disputed by the respondents in the lower court. The claimant's case was that on 24.09.2003 at 8.00 pm, he was travelling in a jeep KL/I8687, when he reached at Ayyampuzha, the vehicle capsized, as a result, he sustained serious injuries. The driver and owner were set ex-parte. The insurer admitted the insurance of the vehicle. The claimant examined PW1 and his documents were marked as Exts.A1 to A10. Respondents did not adduce any evidence.

¶21

The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the fourth respondent was not the owner of the jeep and he obtained the policy by suppressing the material facts. Even though such a contention was raised

¶22

MACA.No. 1685 of 2009

¶23

¶24

by the appellant, no documents were produced in the lower court or before this court to substantiate that contention.

¶25

Section 157 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 reads as

¶26

follows:

¶27

(1) Where a person in whose favour the certificate of insurance has been issued in accordance with the provisions of the Chapter transfers to another person the ownership of the motor vehicle in respect of which such insurance was taken together with the policy of insurance relating thereto, the certificate of insurance and the policy described in the certificate shall be deemed to have been transferred in favour of the person to whom the motor vehicle is transferred with effect from the date of its transfer.

¶28

(2) The transferee shall apply within fourteen days from the date of transfer in the prescribed from to the insurer for making necessary changes in regard to the fact of transfer in the certificate of insurance and the policy described in the certificate in his favour and the insurer shall make the necessary changes in the certificate and the policy of insurance in regard to the transfer of insurance.

¶29

According to Section 157 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act), where a person in whose favour the certificate of insurance has been issued in accordance with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act transfers to another person the ownership of the motor vehicle in respect of which such insurance was taken together with the policy of insurance relating thereto, the certificate of insurance and the policy described in the certificate shall be deemed to have been

¶30

MACA.No. 1685 of 2009

¶31

¶32

transferred in favour of the person to whom the motor vehicle is transferred with effect from the date of its transfer. Here, the vehicle was transferred from the first respondent to the fourth respondent and valid insurance coverage to the vehicle.

¶33

According to Section 50 of the Act, immediately after transfer of the ownership of the vehicle, the tranferee has to inform the matter to the Registering authority within fourteen days, such information was not given in this case, that will not be a ground to reject the claim of the third parties. The insurer has not taken any defence in the lower court about suppression of facts and no documents were produced with regard to the above contention, in the circumstance this appeal is dismissed. The appellant is directed to satisfy the award forthwith.

¶34

Sd/- P.D.RAJAN JUDGE

¶35

bng/30.10.18

National Insurance Co. Ltd., v. Rajan and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

National Insurance Co. Ltd., v. Rajan and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jose Vs the Registrar, Kerala Agriculture

Musthafa Ramazan Vs Puthanpurakkal Joseph

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Mohammed Rafeek

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Benny

Thanka Rajan.J. Vs R.Sadanandan and Others

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Aliyaru Kunju