U.M.UMMER Vs. MAMMEN P.E.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second respondent appears through counsel. Notice to the first respondent is dispensed with in view of the decision I propose to take in this appeal.

(2.) THE appeal arises from the award dated 10.12.2009 of the M.A.C.T, Muvattupuzha (for short, "the Tribunal") in O.P(M.V). No.1053 of 2006. The Tribunal while awarding compensation to the first respondent directed the second respondent to deposit the sum and permitted it to recover the said amount from the appellant who is the owner cum rider of the offending motor vehicle for the reason that he was not able to show that as on the date of the accident (29.08.2006) he was holding a valid driving license.

(3.) THE learned Senior Advocate for the second respondent has submitted that even as per the contention raised by the appellant in his written statement, he had renewed his license from 14.12.2006 to 13.12.2011 in which case, it is clear that as on the date of accident (29.08.2006) the appellant did not have any valid driving license.