IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2011 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1933 MACA.No. 1598 of 2011() ----------------------- OPMV.166/2004 of ADDL.MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS ------------------------- 1. JESSY PETER @ JASEENTHA, W/O.LATE PETER VARGHESE, AGED 47, OLATTUPURATH HOUSE, CHITTOOR KARA, CHERANELLOOR VILLAGE, POOZHITHODE FERY ROAD, CHITTOOR. 2. NEETHU PETER, D/O.PETER VARGHESE, AGED 22, OLATTUPURATH HOUSE, CHITTOOR KARA, CHERANELLOOR VILLAGE, POOZHITHODE FERY ROAD, CHITTOOR. 3. NITHIN PETER, S/O.PETER VARGHESE, AGED 17, MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER AND GUARDIAN JESSY PETER @ JASEENTHA, W/O.LATE PETER VARGHESE, AGED 47, OLATTUPURATH HOUSE, CHITTOOR KARA, CHERANELLOOR VILLAGE, POOZHITHODE FERY ROAD, CHITTOOR. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS K.PHILIP SMT.T.MANASY RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. VARGHESE, S/O. VARGHESE, KOCHERIL HOUSE, CHITTILANCHERI DESOM, GOMATHI ESTATE, ALATHOOR TALUK, PALAKKAD NOW RESIDING AT KALATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, VADUTHALA P.O., NEAR OLD POST OFFICE, VADUTHALA, CHERANALLOOR VILLAGE, KOCHI-682 023. 2. THE MANAGING PARTNER, M/S. RANI TRAVELS, NORTH RAILWAY STATION ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 018. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, VETTUKATTIL BUILDING, JOSE JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 006. BY ADV. JOHN JOSEPH VETTIKKAD ( SC FOR R3) THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- M.A.C.A. No. 1598 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of October, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The claimants are the appellants. They are wife and two minor children of a deceased person - one Peter Varghese who was aged about 47 years. He suffered injuries in a motor accident which took place on 15/3/2003. He had suffered multiple serious injuries. He continued as an inpatient. He was discharged on 13/6/03 allegedly because there was no improvement on his condition. He succumbed to his injuries on 3/8/03. A claim was staked by the claimants after the death of the deceased. 2. Against a total claim of `4,04,500/-, the Tribunal awarded only an amount of `3,09,432/- as compensation as per the details given in paragraph-8 of the impugned award. 3. The Tribunal, in the absence of a post-mortem certificate, was not prepared to accept that the accident was responsible for the death of the deceased. The learned counsel for the appellants argues that it is most unfortunate that such a view was taken by the Tribunal. There was virtually no dispute on that M.A.C.A. No. 1598 of 2011 -: 2 :- aspect and it is, in these circumstances, that better evidence was not made available before the Tribunal. The learned counsel for the appellant prays that, in these circumstances, opportunity may be given to the appellants to substantiate their claim by remand of the matter back to the Tribunal. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the insurance company who has been made entirely liable under the impugned award. We have considered all the relevant inputs. We are satisfied that the interests of justice demand that the matter must be sent back to the court below for fresh disposal with opportunity to the parties to adduce further evidence. We make it clear that it shall be open to the appellants to adduce evidence to show that the death eventually on 3/8/03 was a result of the motor accident which occurred on 15/3/03. 5. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the option of the appellants to amend the claim may also be left open when the matter is being remanded to the court below. We are satisfied that the said request can also be accepted. 6. As respondents 1 and 2 were ex parte before the court below and the insurance company has been made entirely liable to satisfy the award, we have not chosen to issue notice to M.A.C.A. No. 1598 of 2011 -: 3 :- respondents 1 and 2. 7. In the result: (a) This appeal is allowed in part. (b) The impugned award is set aside and the Tribunal is directed to dispose of the matter afresh in accordance with law after giving parties opportunities to adduce evidence (and amend the claim if the same is found to be necessary). (c) The parties shall appear before the Tribunal on 1/12/2011 to continue the proceedings. 8. A copy of this judgment shall be issued to the learned counsel for the appellants for production before the Tribunal. 9. The Registry shall also communicate this judgment forthwith to the Tribunal. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge