Basheer, J. - (1.) APPELLANT No.1 is stated to be the registered owner of a car bearing registration No.KL 2A 5563 which was allegedly involved in a road traffic accident that occurred during 1994, when it dashed against a two wheeler. Respondent No.1 herein who allegedly sustained certain injuries while he was travelling as a pillion on the two wheeler referred to above bearing registration No. KLB 9035 sought compensation from the appellants and respondent No.4 Insurance Company. The case of the claimant was that the vehicle belonging to appellant No.1 and driven by appellant No.2 had caused the accident.
(2.) THE appellants, admittedly, did not contest the case before the Tribunal, since, according to them, they obtained a legal advice that they would be exonerated from any liability as their vehicle was not involved in the accident. Moreover, since the vehicle was insured with M/s. National Insurance Company, the insurer would nevertheless indemnify them even assuming it was ultimately held that the vehicle was involved in such an accident. But respondent No.4 Insurance Company was impleaded before the Tribunal as the insurer of the two wheeler. In other words, the insurer of the car was not impleaded in the case. The Tribunal after considering the materials available before it passed an award in a sum of Rs.87,000/- with 9% interest and directed the appellants to pay the same to the claimant in equal proportion since obviously they had not contested the case. The above award is under challenge in this appeal. The primary contention raised by the appellants is that their vehicle (KL 2A 5563) was never involved in the alleged accident as contended by the claimant. It is further contended by them that their vehicle was validly insured with M/s. National Insurance Company, Kayamkulam branch. But as mentioned earlier, the National Insurance Company, Kayamkulam Branch was not impleaded in the case at all. Incidentally, the Kollam Branch of the same Company was impleaded as the insurer of the two wheeler.
(3.) SRI.Joe Kalliath, learned counsel for the Insurance Company, has submitted that on verification of the records it has been found that the Kayamkulam Branch of the Company had in fact issued Annexure II policy in respect of the car and at the time of the accident the vehicle was validly covered under the said policy. It is however contended by the learned counsel that any accident involving the said car during 1994 was never reported to the Company. We have carefully perused the impugned award and Annexure I report of the Police and Annexure II photocopy of the policy issued in respect of the car belonging to appellant No.1.;