Dismissed

Prasad v. Joju Melayil T.A.

Kerala HC12 Dec 2018MACA/3466/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal awarded ₹2,05,610 for injuries sustained when a motorcycle was hit by a private auto rickshaw. The appellant driver lacked a valid driving licence and badge for the vehicle type. The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding the insurer remains liable under Section 149(2) despite the driver's violation of policy conditions.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; insurer directed to satisfy the award as held by the Tribunal.

Prasad Vs Joju Melayil T.A. — 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

WEDNESDAY,THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 21ST AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶5

MACA.NO. 3466 OF 2015

¶6

AGAINST THE AWARD IN O.P.(M.V.) NO.1141/2005 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR DATED 15-11-2012

¶7

APPELLANTS/1ST RESPONDENT :

¶8

PRASAD, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, KOLANGARA HOUSE, VADOORKARA, THRISSUR, KOORKKENCHERY, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.P.SANJAY SMT.A.PARVATHI MENON SRI.K.P.ABDUL RASSAK SRI.SUSEEL M.MENON

¶10

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER :

¶11

1 JOJU MELAYIL T.A. S/O.ANTONY THARAKAN MELAYIL HOUSE, KOONAMMOOCHI P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT-675001.

¶12

2 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, PARK HOUSE, ROUND NORTH, THRISSUR-695001.

¶13

3 MUHAMMAD ASHRAF @ MUHAMMED, S/O.SULAIMAN, PUZHAKKAL HOUSE, VADOORKARA, KOORKKENCHERY, THRISSUR DISTRICT-695001.

¶14

BY ADVS. SRI.P.V.CHANDRA MOHAN SMT.S.JAYASREE

¶15

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

MACA.NO. 3466 OF 2015

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

This appeal is preferred against the award in O.P. (M.V.) No.1141 of 2005 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur. On 05.04.2004 at 4.30 p.m., the 1^st respondent was riding a motorcycle through Thrissur Swaraj Round, at that time another auto rickshaw KL-8/N-752 driven in a rash and negligent manner hit on the back side of the motorcycle, as a result he sustained serious injuries. Immediately he was removed to hospital. The accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the auto rickshaw by its driver. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.2,05,610/- (Rupees Two Lakh Five Thousand Six Hundred and Ten only) with 8% interest and proportionate cost and directed the insurer to satisfy the award and reimburse the amount from the owner of the vehicle. Hence this appeal.

¶20

The accident was not disputed by the respondents in the lower court. The driver and owner were ex parte. The insurer admitted the insurance of the vehicle. Claimant was

¶21

MACA.NO. 3466 OF 2015 3

¶22

examined as PW1 and his documents were marked as

¶23

Exts.A1 to A13. Copy of the policy was marked as Ext.B1.

¶24

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant, in his appeal memorandum, submitted that the appellant did not get any opportunity to produce the driving licence before the Court. Revenue recovery proceedings were initiated against the appellant. He also contended that the absence of any licence or badge cannot be treated as a reason for the insurance company from absolving the liability.

¶25

It is pertinent to note that Sec.147 of the Motor Vehicles Act says about the requirement of policy and limits of its liability. When there is violation of the policy conditions, the insurer has a right to reimburse the amount from the owner of the vehicle [Section 149(2)]. In this case, the driver

¶26

was not holding a valid driving licence on the date of accident. The offending vehicle is a three wheeler and the driver was not holding a badge for driving that vehicle. In the absence of such effective valid driving licence, the learned Tribunal directed the insurer to satisfy the award and

¶27

MACA.NO. 3466 OF 2015

¶28

¶29

reimburse the amount from the owner of the vehicle. There is no illegality in the above direction. There is no merit in this

¶30

appeal and it is dismissed accordingly.

Sd/-

P.D. RAJAN JUDGE

/True Copy/ P.A. To Judge

Prasad v. Joju Melayil T.A.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasad v. Joju Melayil T.A.

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

The Director General of Police, Kerala Vs Pradeep Kumar

Sivadas Alias Sivadasan Vs Radhakrishnan

The Director General of Police Vs Joseph

Syamalakumari Vs Prakash Unnithan

Syamalakumari Vs Prakash Unnithan

Sharone @ Alwin Shaji, Vs K.Sujatha