IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2009 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 MACA.No. 1681 of 2004() ----------------------- OP.MV.592/1999 of M.A.C.T., MANJERI .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT; -------------------------------------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., MALAPPURAM NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, THIRD PARTY CLAIMS CELL, M.G.ROAD, KOCHI 16. BY MR.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER: ----------------------------------------------- KALATHIL MARIUMMA, W/O.ABDUL KAREEM, PULIKKUNNUMMAL, KAMARA MANZIL, KARAKUNNU P.O. MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.R.RAMAN & P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JJ ----------------------------- M.A.C.A No.1681 of 2004-C ------------------------------ Dated this the 21st day of December, 2009. J U D G M E N T P.R.Raman J The appellant is the insurer of the vehicle. Smt.Kalathil Mariumma aged 50 years, the claimant before the Tribunal who alleged that while walking as pedestrian, a motor cycle ridden rashly and negligently by the first respondent came and hit her and as a result she sustained injuries. For the injuries sustained she claimed compensation. The second respondent in the claim petition is the owner of the vehicle and the 3rd respondent is the appellant/insurer. According to the appellant the accident happened when the claimant was travelling as a pillion rider in a motor cycle ridden by none other than her own son, who was a minor and did not possess a valid driving licence. The respondent admitted that there was insurance coverage to her vehicle. On the side of the 3rd respondent/appellant, Exts.B1 and B2 were marked and the Investigating Officer of the insurance company was examined as RW1. But the Court below found that Ext.A6 copy of the charge M.A.C.A No.1681 of 2004-C 2 sheet shows that the rider of the motor vehicle was charge sheeted under Sections 279 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the driver and owner of the vehicle remained ex-parte. In such circumstances, based on Ext.A1 copy of the FIR and also Ext.A6 charge sheet, the Court below accepted the case of the claimant and found negligence on the part of the first respondent, rider of the vehicle. 2. The learned counsel Sri.Mathews Jacob, appearing for the appellant contended that the Tribunal ought to have accepted the evidence adduced on the part of the insurance company. The court below found that the accident occurred as a result of negligent driving of the claimant's son, who was a minor without any valid licence. With the available evidence on record we are unable to accept the contention. The registration particulars of the vehicle would have been called for/summoned from the registration department to prove the ownership of the vehicle. That was not done. None of the police officers who charge sheeted the first respondent was also examined in the case. In the absence of better evidence on records, it cannot be said that the finding of the Tribunal is in any way perverse. In the circumstances, the finding of M.A.C.A No.1681 of 2004-C 3 the Tribunal attributing negligence on the part of the first respondent is only to be confirmed. As against a claim for an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- only an amount of Rs.73,800/- was awarded under different heads. As a matter of fact the substantial amount of Rs.15,000/- was awarded towards medical expenses incurred to the claimant. The amount awarded towards pain and suffering, transportation charges, damages to clothing and by- stander's expense etc are very nominal. Considering the severity of the injuries sustained, the compensation awarded towards pain and suffering and the medical expenses cannot said to be on the higher side. In the result, we find that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is also not liable for any interference. I find no merit in the appeal. Hence dismissed. Sd/- P.R.RAMAN (JUDGE) Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON (JUDGE) ab