Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.
This appeal arises from an award of a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the two Insurance Companies.
2. Two scooters collided. The claimant was the pillion rider on one of the scooters. He applied for compensation impleading the riders, owners and insurers of both the scooters. Compensation was fixed. Insurance cover of both the vehicles stood admitted. Tribunal held that the offending vehicle was the one other than the scooter on which the claimant was pillion riding. Tribunal further held that the person who was riding that offending vehicle did not have licence. Accordingly, the insurer of that vehicle was directed to pay the compensation and then, recover it from the owner.
3. The appellant who is the owner of the vehicle which was found to be the offending one, pleads that he did not get due notice from the Tribunal. He moved this appeal with an application seeking condonation of delay when he faced revenue recovery proceedings at the instance of the insurer. The delay stands condoned by an earlier order.
4. Going by the appeal memorandum, the stand taken by the appellant is that though he is the owner of the vehicle, he cannot be attributed with knowledge as to whether the person who was riding the vehicle possessed due licence. However, during the pendency of this appeal, the appellant has brought materials under certification of the competent authority showing that the second respondent Sri. V.I.Hameed who was allegedly riding the offending vehicle at the time of accident held a valid licence to ride a motor cycle with gear. The validity period of that licence was from 20.6.2001 to 21.1.2009. The accident was on 11.10.2001. Therefore, the person who was riding the scooter had a valid licence. Once that evidence is on record, we need not go into any other issue since there is reliable material to hold that the insurer is not entitled to recover any amount from the appellant. We allow I.A.No.1320 of 2014, which was received on record as additional document. That will stand marked as Ext.B2 following the documents marked by the Tribunal.
In the result, accepting and acting upon Ext.B2 as evidence as to the driving licence, this appeal is allowed vacating the direction in the impugned award authorising the insurer to recover the amount from the appellant. No costs.
Sd/-
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN JUDGE Sd/-
BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH ks. JUDGE True copy P.S.To Judge