Allowed

Prabhakaran v. Ibrahim

Kerala HC3 Sept 2021MACA/340/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant was not liable as the vehicle ownership had been lawfully transferred. The Tribunal's reliance on the insurance policy was rejected. The Award implicating the appellant is set aside and the matter remanded for a fresh award against the actual liable parties.

What did the court decide?

The appellant is declared not liable. The Award to the extent finding the appellant liable is set aside. The case is remanded to the Tribunal for a fresh Award.

Prabhakaran Vs Ibrahim — 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

FRIDAY, THE 3^RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 12TH BHADRA, 1943

¶5

MACA NO. 340 OF 2014

¶6

AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 14.06.2013 IN OPMV 243/2008 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT

¶7

CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD

¶8

APPELLANT/1ST PETITIONER:

¶9

PRABHAKARAN, S/O.RAMANKUTTY, AGED 62 YEARS,VIAJAYAPURA COLONY, THIRUNELLAI, PALAKKAD - 678 020.

¶10

BY ADV SRI.K.P.BALAGOPAL

¶11

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 IBRAHIM, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.KOYAKUTTY, NEITHALA, ERATTAKULAM, ELAPULLY, PALAKKAD - 678 622

¶13

2 ABBAS, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.MOIDEENKUTTY, NEITHALA, ERATTAKULAM, ELAPPULLY, PALAKKAD - 678 622.

¶14

3 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD. P.B.NO.43, N.S.TOWER, NEAR STADIUM BUS STAND, PALAKKAD - 678 013.

¶15

4 MUSTHAFA, S/O.SYED RAWTHER, CHETHALIPALAM, KUZHALMANNAM, CHITHALI P.O., PALAKKAD - 678 702.

¶16

MACA NO. 340 OF 2014

¶17

¶18

BY ADVS. BENOJ C AUGUSTIN SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN JACOB SEBASTIAN J.KASTHURI P.MURALEEDHARAN NAGARAJ NARAYANAN PRATHAP PILLAI SAIJO HASSAN SEBIN THOMAS VIVEK V. KANNANKERI

¶19

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

MACA NO. 340 OF 2014

¶21

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

The appeal is filed by the 1^st respondent in O.P. (MV) No.243/2008. The appellant was arrayed as the owner of the offending vehicle. His case is that he had purchased the vehicle in January 2004 and had transferred it to one Sri.Joy on 16.12.2004. Sri.Joy had later transferred the vehicle on 08.06.2006 to one Sri.Musthafa, who is the 4^th respondent in this appeal and the 4^th respondent before the Tribunal. The accident occurred on 29.09.2007. The appellant's case is that he cannot be made liable since he was not the owner with effect from 16.12.2004. The Tribunal had relied on the policy, which was produced as Ext.A5 which showed the name of the appellant as the owner of the vehicle. The appellant had produced before the court below Ext.B1, which is a copy of the certificate of registration which clearly shows endorsements regarding the transfer in favour of Sri.Joy and the subsequent transfer in favour of Sri.Musthafa on 16.12.2004 and

¶24

MACA NO. 340 OF 2014

¶25

¶26

08.06.2006 respectively.

¶27

2. Before this Court, the appellant has also produced Annexure 1, which is the registration certificate particulars issued by the Joint Regional Transport Officer, Sub Regional Transport Office, Alathur, which shows that the vehicle had been transferred to Sri.Joy and later to Sri.Musthafa. The Tribunal has in its Award found that the 2^nd respondent driver and the 4^th respondent Sri.Musthafa are jointly and severally liable for due discharge of the Award debt and has also directed the appellant to deposit the Award amount with interest till such deposit and costs within one month from the date of the Award.

¶28

3. In the light of the evidence available on record in the form of Ext.B1, the Tribunal ought not to have passed an Award as against the appellant since he cannot be termed as the owner of the vehicle. The reliance placed merely on the insurance policy was not proper.

¶29

MACA NO. 340 OF 2014

¶30

¶31

In the result, the appeal is allowed. It is

¶32

declared that the appellant is not liable to pay any compensation with regard to the accident that happened on 29.09.2007. The Award to the extent it finds the appellant liable is set aside. The case is remanded back to the Tribunal to pass a fresh Award against the persons who are liable to pay the compensation. The appellant will be entitled to claim refund of the amount which had been deposited by him before the Tribunal in discharge of the liability under the Award, in the light of the findings in this appeal. The Tribunal shall pass fresh orders within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The parties other than the appellant shall appear before the Tribunal on 05.10.2021.

Sd/-

T.R.RAVI

JUDGE

MACA NO. 340 OF 2014

¶38

¶39

APPENDIX

¶40

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS

¶41

ANNEXURE 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE PARTICULARS OBTAINED FROM SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, ALATHUR

Prabhakaran v. Ibrahim

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabhakaran v. Ibrahim

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunny Ma Vs John Joseph

Krishna Bahadur Rai Vs K.G.Jayarajan

V.N.Public Health & Educational Trust Vs State of Kerala

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Thankappan Chettiyar

Saffe Panel Industry (P) Ltd., Vs State of Kerala

Evershine Petroleum Pvt. Ltd., Vs State of Kerala