HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) Against the award passed in O.P. (MV) No. 1472 of 1993 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. Neyyattinkara, this appeal is preferred by the first respondent, owner of the vehicle. The applicant as claimant filed .. the above said O.P. (MV) for award of compensation on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. As per the claimant, the scooter driven by the second respondent hit against him sustained injuries on 12-03-1989. The , first respondent is the guardian of the second respondent who was a minor at the time of accident. The O.P. was initially allowed by the Tribunal by awarding an amount of Rs. 13,000/- with 12% interest per annum from the date of application against the appellant.
(2.) The claim petition was originally filed before the M.A.C.T., Thiruvananthapuram. On the constitution of the M.A.C.T, Neyyattinkara, it was transferred to M.A.C.T., Neyyattinkara and re - numbered as O.P. (MV) No. 1472 of 1993. The appellant was unaware of the same. An award was passed by the Tribunal without hearing the appellant. Subsequently the ex parte award was set aside and the appellant filed a written statement and shown the name of the insurer of the vehicle and the details of the policy. He also filed a petition to implead the insurer as additional respondent on 25-03-1998 and the petition was tried afresh. But the learned Tribunal without proper appreciation of the facts and circumstances of the case passed an award directing payment of compensation of Rs. 13,000/- to respondents 1 and 2. The third respondent insurance company is directed to deposit the entire amount, less interest to the award amount from 13-03-1991 till 24-03-1998, within one month from the date of passing of the award. The appellant was directed to deposit the interest of the award amount from 13-03-1991 till 24-03-1998 within one month. Against the said finding, this appeal is preferred by the first respondent, owner of the vehicle.
(3.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as the respondents. The actual dispute is with regard to the interest on the amount awarded from 13-03-1991 to'24-03-1998. It is true that the third respondent was not impleaded on the date of filing the claim petition. In the application itself, it was stated that the details of the insurance policy is not known to the. claimant. An ex parte award was passed on 29-11-1994. The said award was reviewed as per the application of the appellant. It seems that he has given the details of the insurance . policy and also filed a petition to implead the insurer as additional respondent. The petition was allowed and the insurer was impleaded as additional respondent No. 2 in the O.P. As per the appellant the insurance company is liable to pay the entire compensation with interest and costs as per S.149 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Under S.149 of the Motor Vehicles Act, if after a certificate of insurance has been issued under sub-s.(3) of S.147 in favour of the person by whom a policy has been effected, judgment or award in respect of any such liability as is required to be covered by a policy under clause (b) of sub-s.(1) of S.147 (being a liability covered by the terms of the policy) is obtained against any person insured by the policy, then, notwithstanding that the insurer may be entitled to avoid or cancel or may , have avoided or cancelled the policy, the insurer shall subject to the provisions of this section, pay to the person - entitled to the benefit of the decree any sum not exceeding the sum assured pas able thereunder, as if he were the judgment debtor, in respect of the liability together with any amount payable in respect of cost and any sum payable in respect of interest on that sum by virtue of any enactment relating to interest on judgments. ";
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.