IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 30TH MAGHA 1930 MACA.No. 742 of 2005 ---------------------- OPMV.1531/1995 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT ----------------------- N.SUJATHA, W/O.LATE MURALEEDHARAN, D/O.NARAYANAN, MAMBAD, P.O.KIZHAKKENCHERRY, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.SUMATHY DANDAPANI, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. V.MOHANAN, S/O.UNNI, NELLIAMKUNNA, ALATHUR POST, PALAKKAD DT., (DRIVER OF BUS KL 9A 5511). 2. K.RAMACHANDRAN, S/O.KANDAMUTHAN, PUNGODE VEEDU, ALATHUR POST, PALAKKAD, (OWNER OF BUS KL 9A 5511). 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., SHOBHA TSM COMPLEX, V.H.ROAD, PALAKKAD, (POLICY NO.441102/212/OOO/MV/5179/94) C.NO.CVP/4819/95. 4. M.V.SUBRAMANIAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, MANKARA VEEDU, KIZHAKKENCHERRY POST, KIZHAKKANCHERRY GRAMAM, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD. 5. K.THANKAMANI, W/O.SUBRAMANIAN, DO. DO. ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ------------------------------------ M.A.C.A No.742 of 2005 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of February, 2009 O R D E R BASANT, J. The claimant before the Tribunal is the appellant before us. She claimed compensation for the loss suffered by her on account of the death of her husband in a motor accident, which took place on 27.01.1995. The parents of the deceased and his siblings filed another different and separate claim for compensation. The claim filed by the petitioner was taken on file as O.P.M.V No.1531 of 1995. In that, the parents of the deceased were shown as respondents 4 and 5. This appeal arises from the award in that O.P. 2. The parents, that is the said respondents 4 and 5 along with other children of theirs staked a claim for compensation showing the appellant herein as respondent No.4. That was registered as O.P.M.V No. 1232 of 1995. Both those petitions were taken up together along with another claim for compensation arising out of the same accident. Parties adduced evidence and all the 3 petitions were disposed of by a common award. Compensation was awarded for loss suffered by the M.A.C.A No.742 of 2005 2 dependents on account of the death of the deceased husband of the appellant. A total amount of Rs.10,71,500/- was directed to be paid as compensation for loss suffered by all the dependents/claimants of the deceased. The appellant was awarded an amount of Rs.70,000/-, whereas the claimants in O.P.M.V No.1232 of 1995 were awarded an amount of Rs.10,01,500/-. The appellant preferred 2 appeals against the common award. M.A.C.A No.826 of 2005 was preferred against the common award in so far as it relates to O.P.M.V No.1232 of 1995. This M.A.C.A is filed in so far as the common award relates to O.P.M.V No.1531 of 1995. 3. Surprisingly M.A.C.A No.825 of 2005 appears to have been taken up for disposal earlier and by judgment dated 14.07.2008 another Division Bench of this Court allowed the appeal filed by the appellant and directed payment of a further amount of Rs.1,57,500/- along with proportionate interest to the appellant in addition to the amount of Rs.70,000/- which was already directed to be paid. 4. It passes our comprehension as to why none of the parties brought the fact to the notice of the said Division bench that this M.A.C.A is also pending against the same common award. M.A.C.A No.742 of 2005 3 5. Be that as it may, the Division bench has already considered the validity and acceptability of the common award and has issued directions accepting the challenge raised by the appellant. 6. In these circumstances the appellant, who is bound by the judgment in M.A.C.A No.826 of 2005, cannot now be heard to challenge the impugned common award afresh in this M.A.C.A. The said attempt must necessarily fail. If the appellant is aggrieved by the impugned award or the directions for payment under the common award, the appellant's option, it appears to us, is only to challenge the judgment dated 14.07.2008 in M.A.C.A No.826 of 2005. 7. With the above observations, this M.A.C.A is dismissed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) rtr/-