JUDGMENT :

The 3rd respondent insurance company preferred the above appeal assailing the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Tirur in O.P.(M.V.)No.963/2005, essentially aggrieved by refusal of their right of recovery from the insured, claimed on the premise that the 1st respondent driver was not duly licensed to drive the vehicle in question at the time of accident.

2. The short question involved in this Motor Accidents Claims Appeal is whether the appellant/insurance company ought to have been afforded a right to recover the compensation amount from the 2nd respondent/owner of the vehicle, since it is established that the 1st respondent/driver was not duly licensed at the time of accident. The appellant/insurance company (3rd respondent in the O.P.) took a contention that the 1st respondent had no valid licence at the time of accident to drive the car, which knocked down the victim girl, aged 7 years, who later succumbed to the injuries. The 1st respondent/driver remained ex parte. The appellant (3rd respondent in the O.P.) filed I.A.No.1434/2007 calling upon the 1st respondent/driver to produce his driving licence. Though notice was issued, the same was not served upon h