Allowed

Manaf K.P. v. Sajitha

Kerala HC13 Sept 2021MACA/237/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a motor accident claims appeal where the appellant contested the finding that he lacked a valid license. The High Court admitted the appellant's evidence of a valid license, held the lower tribunal's finding of fact wrong, and modified the award to direct the insurer to pay compensation as there was no policy violation.

What did the court decide?

Award of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal modified to direct the insurer to pay the amount awarded to the claimant.

Manaf K.P. Vs Sajitha — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

¶4

MONDAY, THE 13^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 22ND BHADRA, 1943

¶5

MACA NO. 237 OF 2014

¶6

AGAINST THE AWARD IN OP(MAC) NO. 533/2011 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS

¶7

TRIBUNAL TIRUR, TIRUR

¶8

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶9

MANAF K.P.

¶10

S/O.ABDURAHIMAN, KONGANTE PURAKKA (H), CHETTIPPADI (PO), TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT

¶11

BY ADV SRI.K.DILIP

¶12

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 SAJITHA AGED 38 YEARS, W/O.SURESH, PAYYAPANTHA (H), THUMARAKKAVU, POOKAYIL (PO), TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 676 107.

¶14

2 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE C. LTD THAZHEPPALAM, TIRUR (PO) MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 676 101

¶15

BY ADV SMT.T.C.SOWMIAVATHY, FOR R2

¶16

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

MACA NO. 237 OF 2014

¶18

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The appeal has been filed by the 1^st respondent in O.P.(MAC) No.533 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Tirur. The appellant, who is the owner-cum-driver of an autorickshaw, has filed this appeal being aggrieved by the direction contained in the Award to satisfy the compensation amount payable to the claimant, on the basis of the finding that the appellant did not have a valid driving licence at the time of the incident. The contention of the appellant is that he had a valid driving licence and the same had been entrusted with his Advocate for making necessary submissions before the Tribunal. But unfortunately the counsel had gone abroad without informing the appellant. It is submitted that this was the circumstance in which the driving licence could not be produced before the Tribunal. The appellant has filed I.A.No.1/2021 producing along with the driving licence No.10/888/1999

¶21

MACA NO. 237 OF 2014

¶22

¶23

issued on 02.08.2007, which shows that it was valid from 30.07.2007 to 29.07.2027. The accident occurred on 07.09.2010 and hence the appellant was having a valid driving licence at the relevant point of time. There is no reason to deny the appellant, the opportunity to produce his driving licence at the appellate stage, having regard to the reasons stated in support of the petition seeking production of the document. The only reason for mulcting the appellant with liability is the finding that the appellant did not have a valid driving licence. This finding of fact is found to be wrong on the basis of the evidence on record. The award is hence liable to be modified by shifting the liability to pay the amount of compensation to the insurer since there is no violation of the policy conditions.

¶24

In the result, the appeal is allowed. The award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Tirur in O.P.(MAC) No.533/2011 is modified by directing the 2^nd respondentinsurer to pay the amount awarded to the 1^st respondent.

¶25

MACA NO. 237 OF 2014

¶26

¶27

The Registry shall return the original of the licence produced in this appeal to the appellant after retaining a copy on file. The amount of 25,000/- deposited by₹ the appellant before the Tribunal for preferring this appeal shall be refunded to the appellant on proper application being filed. The 2^nd respondent shall take steps to satisfy the award within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The parties will bear their respective costs.

Sd/-

T.R.RAVI JUDGE

MACA NO. 237 OF 2014

¶32

¶33

APPENDIX

¶34

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS

¶35

ANNEXURE II THE ORIGINAL OF THE DRIVING LICENCE ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA DATED 02.08.2007

Manaf K.P. v. Sajitha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manaf K.P. v. Sajitha

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

Abdul Basith Vs Sainul Abideen

United Indis Insurance Company Limited Vs Suhara Packayi

Dr. V.V Haridas, Vs Sri.Aby George

St. George Orthodox Syrian Church Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

Sindhu P.S. Vs State F Kerala

Vinod.K.S Vs State Election Commission